Not a squeak about it on this forum and little on the others but has anyone heard about the outcome of the John Galt/Kieth Summers libel trial?

Rumor has it he got 6 years which seems a bit grim.

Apologies if it's a subject that should not be breached on this board.

I read the 6 years rumour on another forum too.

Still nothing in the news

I guess it is time for a bit of research on my part as I have no idea who you are talking about?!?

John Galt, aka Keith SUmmers aka NOTSTICKMAN...

no idea mate.

I guess it is time for a bit of research on my part as I have no idea who you are talking about?!?

He's a legend amongst Expats who take forums seriously. He shut down the Stickman site for months with his allegations, not technically a forum I'll admit, but then supporters of Stickman attacked him on most of them.

He suggested a Farang property developer, a friend of Stickmans, was a little dishonest.... , was accused of libel, a criminal offense in Thailand, which explains why forums are moderated, and apparently has received six years jail for his trouble.

There's an update on his page from him.

Apparently he was in prison for "48 hours" until he raised the money for a bond, but is out now.

There's an update on his page from him.

Apparently he was in prison for "48 hours" until he raised the money for a bond, but is out now.

Please supply link, if you wish to comment on something posted elsewhere.

Link

Link

I don't know what it is all about, but I find it odd that this Galt chap has purchased a domain name for a one page essay.

What domain did he promulgate his alleged libel?

There's more to this, no doubt.

Mate, it's a dark and dreadful tale, not for the weak at heart and definitely not to be read at night.

The site seems to have been drastically cut back (hacked?... hush now sceadugenga) but it's been an ongoing saga for three years or more now. Just google the key words and I don't doubt you'll eventually dredge it all up.

The moral of the story is: don't piss people off on the internet unless you are 100% bulletproof yourself. (And who is?)

its true, defamation or libel is a criminal charge in thailand and, if pursued, can carry a jail sentence for the accused party.

And, my understanding at least, is that it doesn't necessarily have to be a lie for it to be defamation, just the intent to damage another's reputation. I could be wrong but that is what I have been told on more than one occasion.

And the strongest burden of proof is on the party who committed the libel!

Please supply link, if you wish to comment on something posted elsewhere.

Most people interested in and following this story would already be well aware of his website, which is limited to a single page at the moment, and hardly needs more exposure.

If you're not, then there's this great website called Google, which may help.

Criminal or defamatory libel as an offence is a lot more common internationally than people realise. Many countries use it to curtail freedom of speech.

Criminal or defamatory libel as an offence is a lot more common internationally than people realise. Many countries use it to curtail freedom of speech.

Which of course is not the case in Thailand.

I hope you're not trying to take the moral high ground because you happen to live in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

I hope you're not trying to take the moral high ground because you happen to live in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

Not at all - that belongs to the Peoples Republic of Laos - a much more socialistic country than the Southern end of VN.

It is the same wherever I go - the political centre is Hanoi/Tripoli/Berlin. the commercial capital is Saigon/Benghazi/Stuttgart (or wherever) - half a country away at least.

Politics stifles business.

Surprisingly enough when I lived in Vientiane, I saw very little signs of Communism apart from a few flags.

Everyone seemed more interested in making a quid.

Edit: That's Peoples Democratic Republic by the way.

And another thing.... I never heard anyone who lives there use the terms Laos or Laotian. The country's Lao, the people are Lao and the language is Lao.

And the strongest burden of proof is on the party who committed the libel!

If defamation of character is a crime, whether the alleged comments are truthfull or not, then the burden of proof would surely lie in the plaintiff's claim that damage had occurred?

The defamation of character laws of Thailand, that prosecute on damage suffered rather than allow a defence of veracity of comments, brings to mind a speech I read about that was not actually delivered but has been credited to George Smathers, A US politician in the 1950's.

The speech, a political speech designed to sway voters away from the subject, was to have been read to a gathering of uneducated voters. The "Redneck Speech".

"Are you aware that Claude Pepper is known all over Washington as a shameless extrovert? Not only that, but this man is reliably reported to practice nepotism with his sister-in-law, and he has a sister who was once a thespian in wicked New York. Worst of all, it is an established fact that Mr. Pepper, before his marriage, habitually practiced celibacy"

Smathers is credited with finding words that were not libelous (ie they were factual), but nonetheless "sounded" like scandalous accusations (to an uneducated mob) that he was confidant were truthfull, thus believed by his audience.

This could really damage Pepper, but because every word was truthfull, no libel had taken place. Under Thai law, Pepper could sue Smathers.

So Thailand has defamation laws, but not libel laws.

I must confess to periods of celibacy in the past also.....but in my defence, those times were forced upon me, not my choice.

As long as you weren't indulging in the sin of Onan.

As long as you weren't indulging in the sin of Onan.

What's his Nan got to do with it?

And another thing.... I never heard anyone who lives there use the terms Laos or Laotian. The country's Lao, the people are Lao and the language is Lao.

The beer man, don't forget the beer.

Regards.

As long as you weren't indulging in the sin of Onan.

What's his Nan got to do with it?

Probably nothing, Onan is in enough trouble with what he was getting up to

As long as you weren't indulging in the sin of Onan.

What's his Nan got to do with it?

Probably nothing, Onan is in enough trouble with what he was getting up to

Unless she's the one who does the laundry.

As long as you weren't indulging in the sin of Onan.

What's his Nan got to do with it?

Probably nothing, Onan is in enough trouble with what he was getting up to

Unless she's the one who does the laundry.

I bet you know a few thespians.

Probably nothing, Onan is in enough trouble with what he was getting up to

Unless she's the one who does the laundry.

I bet you know a few thespians.

I try to avoid them. They always seems to be fighting each other.