webfact Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Court gets lenient with Sondhi The Nation Sondhi Limthongkul, leader of the yellow-shirt People's Alliance for Democracy, got his three-year jail term reduced to a two-year suspended sentence yesterday following an appellate review of his libel offence against former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. "The defendant [sondhi] has committed one count of defamation because whether or not the plaintiff [Thaksin] believes in black magic is not in the public's interest," the Court of Appeals said in its ruling. The litigation focused on speeches made by Sondhi at PAD rallies in March 2006, which portrayed then-PM Thaksin as being a vote buyer and a crazy leader obsessed with black magic. In the speeches, Sondhi outlined a series of black magic ceremonies involving Thaksin that were performed at Government House and the Erawan shrine. The Criminal Court initially found Sondhi guilty of libel, sentencing him to three years in jail. However, the appellate review said the speeches questioning Thaksin's leadership, his lavish campaign spending and his crazy behaviour were an honest critique of a public figure and could not be considered a defamation offence. Only Sondhi's remarks attacking Thaksin for believing in the power of black magic could be considered a smear because personal faith had no bearing on public interest, the appellate ruling said. The sentencing was readjusted to reflect the offence, and the high court handed down a lenient one. Khunthong Lawseriwanit, who is the co-defendant and editor of the Phujadkarn newspaper, was acquitted of all charges for publishing Sondhi's speeches. -- The Nation 2011-11-30 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 " because whether or not the plaintiff [Thaksin] believes in black magic is not in the public's interest," the Court of Appeals said in its ruling." In a country where the vast majority still believes in ghosts and magic I guess this is is true, sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kutjebu Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 He pay for that,almost with his life .What about his airport case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briggsy Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Somewhere in Dubai, needles are being stuck into a bespectacled doll named Sondhi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phiphidon Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 How many times is it now that this individual has been given a suspended sentence - aren't these suspended sentences conditional upon future behaviour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geriatrickid Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Oh my, leniency shown for a man PTP bashers label as a sworn enemy of Thaksin, and it occurred while the PTP were in office. How will this reduced sentence be interpreted by some? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buchholz Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Oh my, leniency shown for a man PTP bashers label as a sworn enemy of Thaksin, and it occurred while the PTP were in office. How will this reduced sentence be interpreted by some? Probably by the same common sense exhibited by the Appeals Court: However, the appellate review said the speeches questioning Thaksin's leadership, his lavish campaign spending and his crazy behaviour were an honest critique of a public figure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Oh my, leniency shown for a man PTP bashers label as a sworn enemy of Thaksin, and it occurred while the PTP were in office. How will this reduced sentence be interpreted by some? I don't think it was leniency so much as a face saving gesture by the court. The case should have obviously been dismissed, but this was the next best thing and allowed them to save face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) " because whether or not the plaintiff [Thaksin] believes in black magic is not in the public's interest," the Court of Appeals said in its ruling." In a country where the vast majority still believes in ghosts and magic I guess this is is true, sadly. Agreed. Thaksin apparently pretended to believe in it, as a marketing tactic to gain superstitions voters. Same for his use of fortune tellers etc. So it can be seen as have bearing on the public interest. Not to critique the courts decision of course. Likely should have been dismissed. Edited November 30, 2011 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammered Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Great ammo for the red movement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Great ammo for the red movement They need more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oberkommando Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Thaksin apparently pretended to believe in it, as a marketing tactic to gain superstitions voters. He's South East Asian, I guarantee he believes in it. Not yet met one that doesn't; Thai, Malay, Khmer, etc. Even Abhisit believes in it and he was Eton/Oxford educated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insight Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Even Abhisit believes in it and he was Eton/Oxford educated. What gives you that impression? His rebuke to Hun Sen's curses on him was something along the lines of "I don't believe in witchcraft". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) I don't know Thai defamation law, but what the heck difference should it make whether Thaksin's belief in "black magic" is in the public interest or not? It seems like the ex PM did and said various things to give a reasonable belief that in fact he did... And then Sondhi turned around and criticized him publicly for it? How is that defamation, if what's being claimed has a basis in fact? The public has to elect these guys to public office. So their personal beliefs, and sometimes crazy beliefs, have "no bearing on public interest"??? Edited November 30, 2011 by TallGuyJohninBKK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phiphidon Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Even Abhisit believes in it and he was Eton/Oxford educated. What gives you that impression? His rebuke to Hun Sen's curses on him was something along the lines of "I don't believe in witchcraft". "What gives you that impression?" Yes I can't believe at times that he was Eton / Oxford educated. Then again, I can quite believe he would fit in with members of the Bullingdon Club. He does come across as a kind of George Osborne but without the charisma............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pisico Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Even Abhisit believes in it and he was Eton/Oxford educated. What gives you that impression? His rebuke to Hun Sen's curses on him was something along the lines of "I don't believe in witchcraft". It seems to be more of a case of: my witchcraft can beat your witchcraft. After all, Abhisit laid down in empty coffins before the elections. OK, it may not be witchcraft: it's Animism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Payboy Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Even Abhisit believes in it and he was Eton/Oxford educated. What gives you that impression? His rebuke to Hun Sen's curses on him was something along the lines of "I don't believe in witchcraft". It seems to be more of a case of: my witchcraft can beat your witchcraft. After all, Abhisit laid down in empty coffins before the elections. OK, it may not be witchcraft: it's Animism. And dont forget that his administration had the palm trees in front govt. house cut down in Oct 2010, because " they inhibited the building, thus indirectly the PM's authority" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AleG Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 It seems to be more of a case of: my witchcraft can beat your witchcraft. After all, Abhisit laid down in empty coffins before the elections. OK, it may not be witchcraft: it's Animism. Is that supposed to be sarcasm? Because it was PTP morons MP candidates that did that. No wonder Abhisit gets a bad reputation, when he gets smeared with whatever stupid thing his opponents do. What's next, Abhisit torched Central World? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 No-matter side, jail-time for insults are nutty and no-one proclaiming to support Freedom of Speech can ever support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siampolee Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) Personally I never had any problems with ,' Black Magic." either in England or here in Thaialand. Edited November 30, 2011 by siampolee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallr Posted December 2, 2011 Share Posted December 2, 2011 Amazing Thailand, where calling a crazy person... crazy, is a crime. Laugh of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now