Sondhi Jailed Two Years, Fined Bt200,000 For Defaming Gen Mongkol

[h90]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If the Reds get out of control there will be a lot of cowardly farangs fleeing.

I guess no problem....take the red TShirt and pretend to be a good communist and no harm will happen.

[foolforlove]

Assuming guilty as charged, hope he's behind bars soon. Besides that bringing justice, be good to have the "but Sondhi..." button deactivated from all those "red" keyboards.

"The suit said Sondhi defamed Mongkol by alleging him with abusing his authority to siphon money from TPI, which has changed name to IRPC Plc, by paying huge salary to himself and paying a huge management fee to an advisory firm."

I assume that he is not guilty by any common sense. Only by some weird Thai law.

I would complete understand some punishment for taking the airport or the government house, but for telling something that is 99.9 % surely the true is a shame.

"Wierd Thai law" -- you are correct.

Remember that under Thai law, defamation and libel are decided by the EFFECT of what you said.

It does not matter at all if what you say is TRUE. That is irrelevant under Thai law.

But if you make someone "look bad", then you are at risk for libel.

[h90]

Assuming guilty as charged, hope he's behind bars soon. Besides that bringing justice, be good to have the "but Sondhi..." button deactivated from all those "red" keyboards.

"The suit said Sondhi defamed Mongkol by alleging him with abusing his authority to siphon money from TPI, which has changed name to IRPC Plc, by paying huge salary to himself and paying a huge management fee to an advisory firm."

I assume that he is not guilty by any common sense. Only by some weird Thai law.

I would complete understand some punishment for taking the airport or the government house, but for telling something that is 99.9 % surely the true is a shame.

"Wierd Thai law" -- you are correct.

Remember that under Thai law, defamation and libel are decided by the EFFECT of what you said.

It does not matter at all if what you say is TRUE. That is irrelevant under Thai law.

But if you make someone "look bad", then you are at risk for libel.

yes and that is not the strange law.....That would have been the big chance after the coup to clear all that nonsense.....and that chance was missed.....

[cdnvic]

One post on moderation issues removed and one that violated Rule 15: You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law. (and those quoting it)

[hansgruber]

7.5% interest?

I don't see any Thai banks offering those rates on 200,000 baht deposit.

Maybe they thinking of the foreign banks where most of the crooks hide their money.

[Noistar]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

If I recall right he was NOT democratically elected when the coup happened and when he jumped bail HIS party was in power not the army. And it wasn't for concerns about his safety, it was because he lost a rather trivial case in court, which he could have appealed. Which he didn't because the case was so 100 % clear that there was no chance of wining it.

We may be drifting off topic, but as 'geriatrickid' has brought Democracy into the equation, perhaps we should tighten the definition up.

1 - elected Democratically

2 - Governing Democratically

I have been led (or misled) to believe that the lack of point 2 was part of the problem in 2006, where the options for dealing with an abuse of power were limited.

As I say, my contribution may be directed towards an off-topic post.

[Nickymaster]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

Of course. I forgot. Thaksin didn't do anything wrong and all cases are politically motivated. We have all been hallucinating for the past 8 years. What we have seen and heard is all not true We are all wrong. We should start doubting our own judgments. Our master degrees in international business and law are all useless. Thaksin is a victim of the system.

Good night and sweat dreams,

[rixalex]

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

All that would be so much more plausible had Thaksin not stated throughout the whole court case against him that he believed in the justice system and would accept whatever their verdict was; would be so much more plausible had he not waited until he was found guilty to suddenly decide there was a conspiracy against him; would be so much more plausible had it not been his own party in power at the time; would be so much more plausible had it been the other side stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a guilty verdict against him, not the other way round, as it was, him stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a not guilty verdict; would be so much more plausible had he appealed the conviction; would be so much more plausible had he ever come out with evidence against the verdict and a proclamation of innocence - he never declares his innocence and his lawyers never speak of evidence that they have to clear his name.

On the one side there is a mountain of reasons to suggest his trial was fair, and on the other, there are fanatics that will never be able to accept guilt in what he has done, and always look for excuses.

[Nickymaster]

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

All that would be so much more plausible had Thaksin not stated throughout the whole court case against him that he believed in the justice system and would accept whatever their verdict was; would be so much more plausible had he not waited until he was found guilty to suddenly decide there was a conspiracy against him; would be so much more plausible had it not been his own party in power at the time; would be so much more plausible had it been the other side stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a guilty verdict against him, not the other way round, as it was, him stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a not guilty verdict; would be so much more plausible had he appealed the conviction; would be so much more plausible had he ever come out with evidence against the verdict and a proclamation of innocence - he never declares his innocence and his lawyers never speak of evidence that they have to clear his name.

On the one side there is a mountain of reasons to suggest his trial was fair, and on the other, there are fanatics that will never be able to accept guilt in what he has done, and always look for excuses.

Agree, he thought he could bribe the judges but he was wrong.

[Nickymaster]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

Isn't Thaksin the one who has created a dangerous environment (for himself)? As an example, did you know that the reds have attacked (and burned) 36 sites in bangkok alone under the instruction of their leaders. And guess who is the leader of all leaders...

Edited August 9, 2012 by Nickymaster

[rixalex]

Agree, he thought he could bribe the judges but he was wrong.

And that is what he means when he says the case was "political". A man of his power and influence is accustomed to having that power and influence work for him, and when it is required, get him out of a sticky situation. To have two million baht of hard earned graft money thrown back in your face felt to Thaksin i am sure like an act of contempt. How dare anyone think they are superior than him? If he offers you money, you take it, and take it graciously.

(hasten to add - before his staunch defenders rush to say it - Thaksin is far from being the only one around these parts who acts and behaves in this manner)

[billd766]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If the Reds get out of control there will be a lot of cowardly farangs fleeing.

Well none of them fleeing will be me.

I have a Thai wife and son and they mean more to me than anything else at my age of 68.

[billd766]

Not really sure why everyone gets so fired up about all this red/yellow BS, perhaps the notion that there are different laws for the rich has excaped many? If you are in political power here you get off, if the other mobs in then there could be problems (but not necessarily).

I mean how many high and low profile bankers in the West are sitting in jail for obvious and uncontestable fraud...none and that is regardless of who is in power as that pump money into all parties. That the rich or connected live by different rules makes no geographical difference as money buys every system.

Have a beer and relax, remember that blood pressure.

In America, in jail for fraud, all bankers or invetment brokers. Nicholas Cosmo 50 years, Bernard Madoff 150 years, James Lewis 30 years, Peter Lombardi 20 years, Raymond James 15 years and Allen Stanford 110 years. That's just the short list and only America. I think you may have have been mistaken.

Oddly enough Nick Leeson who broke Barings bank only got 6 years.

[geovalin]

As a Yellow Shirt, "jailed" does not mean "go to prison". Only Red Shirts end behind the bars.

[Nickymaster]

As a Yellow Shirt, "jailed" does not mean "go to prison". Only Red Shirts end behind the bars.

Did the yellow shirts kill 20 officials and burn 36 buildings in Bangkok?

[jcw]

Is this the same guy behind The Nation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nation_(Thailand)

[Fozfromoz]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

Of course. I forgot. Thaksin didn't do anything wrong and all cases are politically motivated. We have all been hallucinating for the past 8 years. What we have seen and heard is all not true We are all wrong. We should start doubting our own judgments. Our master degrees in international business and law are all useless. Thaksin is a victim of the system.

Good night and sweat dreams,

You should by an air con, and sleep better.

[philw]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

Of course. I forgot. Thaksin didn't do anything wrong and all cases are politically motivated. We have all been hallucinating for the past 8 years. What we have seen and heard is all not true We are all wrong. We should start doubting our own judgments. Our master degrees in international business and law are all useless. Thaksin is a victim of the system.

Good night and sweat dreams,

Yep, you are dead right.

Sleep well.

[phiphidon]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

Only people like Sondhi can be sentenced to jail 5 times, be bailed 5 times and not spend one night in jail. Why does he need to leave the country, the right people are looking after him?

[phiphidon]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

If I recall right he was NOT democratically elected when the coup happened and when he jumped bail HIS party was in power not the army. And it wasn't for concerns about his safety, it was because he lost a rather trivial case in court, which he could have appealed. Which he didn't because the case was so 100 % clear that there was no chance of wining it.

You don't recall correctly, he was, but I'm sure that you will not be convinced otherwise.

Edited August 9, 2012 by phiphidon

[phiphidon]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

If a political leader has been the object of a military and vested power group's plot to overthrow and sabotage his/her democratically elected government, it would be the wise decision to relocate until such time as the conspiracy can be contained. It is better to be alive and in action so as to continue the the struggle for freedom and democracy than to be a political prisoner. Many political leaders have gone into exile only to return to a triumphant victory. Before a man named Adams became POTUS, he sought political refuge in France, Leaders of the French, Polish and Dutch governments sought refuge in England during the 1940's, Ho Chi Minh and Prince Sihanouk both fled to Vietnam and Cambodia respectively. African leaders frequently seek refuge in neighboring countries when subject to a coup. If not for the hospitality of the EU, many South African government figures would have languished in jail, etc. etc.

There have been many cases of foreigners fleeing Thailand for their personal safety as they face extortion or threats of violence. I hastily left Indonesia after a failed kidnap attempt. Does this make them or me cowards or prudent?

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

Isn't Thaksin the one who has created a dangerous environment (for himself)? As an example, did you know that the reds have attacked (and burned) 36 sites in bangkok alone under the instruction of their leaders. And guess who is the leader of all leaders...

Despite being told this is not about Thaksin they just can't resist with even more unrelated "facts". Would you like to tell us what those 36 "sites" were, who was responsible for attacking and burning them and incidentally just how many of them were ATM's or telephone booths, I like to be sure of "facts" before I quote them..............

[rubl]

Despite being told this is not about Thaksin they just can't resist with even more unrelated "facts". Would you like to tell us what those 36 "sites" were, who was responsible for attacking and burning them and incidentally just how many of them were ATM's or telephone booths, I like to be sure of "facts" before I quote them..............

Well said, dear phiphidon. This topic is about k. Sondhi sentenced for defamation. This topic is not on k. Thaksin, neither on 36 buildings torched on the 19th of May, 2010. It's also not on grenade throwing mystery figures, or peaceful red-shirts. It's not even on the lots of still missing red-shirts who's names I also do not have.

BTW I really appreciate that you like to be sure of 'facts' before quoting them.

ADD: in Yahoo one may search on

+thailand +bangkok +2010 +torched +sites +36

Edited August 9, 2012 by rubl

[whybother]

If I recall right he was NOT democratically elected when the coup happened and when he jumped bail HIS party was in power not the army. And it wasn't for concerns about his safety, it was because he lost a rather trivial case in court, which he could have appealed. Which he didn't because the case was so 100 % clear that there was no chance of wining it.

You don't recall correctly, he was, but I'm sure that you will not be convinced otherwise.

Doesn't stepping down to call election mean that he stopped being the elected PM?

[phiphidon]

If I recall right he was NOT democratically elected when the coup happened and when he jumped bail HIS party was in power not the army. And it wasn't for concerns about his safety, it was because he lost a rather trivial case in court, which he could have appealed. Which he didn't because the case was so 100 % clear that there was no chance of wining it.

You don't recall correctly, he was, but I'm sure that you will not be convinced otherwise.

Doesn't stepping down to call election mean that he stopped being the elected PM?

I'm not going through all that again for your benefit - you don't believe what I've written in the past about timelines, who cares, I don't. You want to split hairs about caretaker PM you go ahead.

Edited August 9, 2012 by phiphidon

[nurofiend]

So if he flees the country now to avoid his sentence will he be given a visa to the USA and warmly welcomed by the Thai embassy in Washington?

Only cowards flee this country.

Only people like Sondhi can be sentenced to jail 5 times, be bailed 5 times and not spend one night in jail. Why does he need to leave the country, the right people are looking after him?

[whybother]

I'm not going through all that again for your benefit - you don't believe what I've written in the past about timelines, who cares, I don't. You want to split hairs about caretaker PM you go ahead.

I'm not talking about whether he was care-taker or not. Being a care-taker PM doesn't make him the "elected PM" at the time of the coup.

[Chupup]

Despite being told this is not about Thaksin they just can't resist with even more unrelated "facts". Would you like to tell us what those 36 "sites" were, who was responsible for attacking and burning them and incidentally just how many of them were ATM's or telephone booths, I like to be sure of "facts" before I quote them..............

Well said, dear phiphidon. This topic is about k. Sondhi sentenced for defamation. This topic is not on k. Thaksin, neither on 36 buildings torched on the 19th of May, 2010. It's also not on grenade throwing mystery figures, or peaceful red-shirts. It's not even on the lots of still missing red-shirts who's names I also do not have.

BTW I really appreciate that you like to be sure of 'facts' before quoting them.

ADD: in Yahoo one may search on

+thailand +bangkok +2010 +torched +sites +36

Even if ppdon does search Yahoo , to quote his own words "( he )will NEVER be convinced "

[craigt3365]

Please stay on topic. This is about Sondhi. Not Thaksin and not the US.

[Babcock]

If someone is unable to obtain a fair trial and is subject to a dangerous environment ith his personal safety at stake , it makes sense to leave until the situation has calmed. If there is a political goal at stake, then there are valid reasons to continue the struggle elsewhere. Better to be alive and functioning than to be dead.

All that would be so much more plausible had Thaksin not stated throughout the whole court case against him that he believed in the justice system and would accept whatever their verdict was; would be so much more plausible had he not waited until he was found guilty to suddenly decide there was a conspiracy against him; would be so much more plausible had it not been his own party in power at the time; would be so much more plausible had it been the other side stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a guilty verdict against him, not the other way round, as it was, him stuffing millions of baht in a box to pass on to the judges, to try and ensure a not guilty verdict; would be so much more plausible had he appealed the conviction; would be so much more plausible had he ever come out with evidence against the verdict and a proclamation of innocence - he never declares his innocence and his lawyers never speak of evidence that they have to clear his name.

On the one side there is a mountain of reasons to suggest his trial was fair, and on the other, there are fanatics that will never be able to accept guilt in what he has done, and always look for excuses.

Agree, he thought he could bribe the judges but he was wrong.

I'd like to see the evidence of the attempt to bribe court officials.

As I understand it the "cake box" story broke in the nation, nowhere else that day.

There were 3 trials taking place and it was assumed the thaksin case was the culprit.

No charges were ever laid against thaksin's lawyers though they were held without charge for 6 months.

A rather unusual trial don't you think?

[Babcock]

Sondhi already has a 20 year prison sentence.

However don't hold your breath.

the first time he went bankrupt his former finance director was made governor of the bank he owed the money to and subsequently forgave him the debt.

That was a stroke of luck!

Sonhi thinks that "Freedom of the Press" means freedom to vilify,to make false claims, to conduct hate campaigns.