webfact Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 DEFAMATION SUIT Court sentences Sondhi to three months in jail The Nation Sondhi BANGKOK: -- People's Alliance for Democracy leader Sondhi Limthongkul on Wednesday had his guilty verdict for libel confirmed in an appellate review although his jail term cut in half to three months. In the sentence reduction, the Court of Appeals cited Sondhi's old age and altruism as grounds for leniency, saying he did not seek self-serving gain by defaming legal adviser Noppadon Pattama. Following the reading of the appellate decision, the defence had sought and received Bt100,000 bail pending the final review by the Supreme Court. Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Noppadon sued for libel, naming Sondhi, other five individuals and two media outlets on the list of defendants. The lower court handed down its decision in 2009, finding Sondhi guilty of defamation. It sentenced Sondhi to a jail term of six months. Two media outlets, Thaiday Dot Com and Manager Media Group, were liable to pay Bt20,000 fine each for disseminating libellous remarks. Sondhi as well as the two media outlets were to publish a summary of the verdict in three national newpapers, Thai Rath, Matichon and Daily News, for seven consecutive days. -- The Nation 2012-09-19 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 They really are scraping the barrel now. "Old age and altruism". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim walker Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 You have to give them 10 out of 10 for creativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 By the time the final appeal is heard he will be even older therefore they will reduce the sentence to two weeks with half the time off for good behaviour. Miracle Thailand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 By the time the final appeal is heard he will be even older therefore they will reduce the sentence to two weeks with half the time off for good behaviour. Miracle Thailand! They will probably end up compensating him for his time in attending and defending his guilty verdict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Payboy Posted September 19, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted September 19, 2012 old age Pity that wasn't a factor for Uncle SMS. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asiawatcher Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 The fact Sondhi was probably right means nothing ... Wonder why it has taken 4 years to get it all into play if judgement was 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarangTalk Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Joke of a 'system'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cloudhopper Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Hasn't he already been sentenced for other crimes as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbrain Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 They really are scraping the barrel now. "Old age and altruism". You're sure they didn't have in mind " Old age and Autism " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ramrod711 Posted September 19, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted September 19, 2012 Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Yet another case where a person is found guilty of libel, for telling the truth! I wonder how they came by this brand of libel and defamation that they use here.....very strange. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Yet another case where a person is found guilty of libel, for telling the truth! I wonder how they came by this brand of libel and defamation that they use here.....very strange. I think when Noppadon received his scholarship, Thaksin was just a twinkle in the political eye of Thailand.The insinuation of lack of loyalty because he received a scholarship is actually quite a nasty one in a Thai context. Irony of ironies, his first "political patron" (according to Wiki) was:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noppadon_Pattama He was President of Thai Students’ Association in Britain 1988-1989. While in Britain he met Chuan Leekpai, leader of the Democrat Party, who became his political patron. Returning to Thailand, Noppadon practised law in Bangkok and became Chuan's secretary during his period as Leader of the Opposition in 1995-97 He's a lawyer, whoever pays the bills gets his services I guess, although the whole story has a certain Star Wars," I am your father Luke", feel to it. Edited September 19, 2012 by Thai at Heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarangTalk Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Wonder if Noppadon advised Chuan's brother Raluek when he embezzled millions from that Thai bank and did a runner to Taiwan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tragickingdom Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Thai courts, they are well known for letting the elite of the hook. Doctors who beat their wife with a golf-club to death are rehabilitated too, as they are pearls for society and still could be used to lecture others..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Woodcaulk Posted September 19, 2012 Popular Post Share Posted September 19, 2012 In keeping with a very old and obscure custom that seems to fall into the category of "must never be spoken of" Sondhi and Thaksin should be locked away from view in the same cell and allowed to fight to the death. The loser never spoken of again the victor in a twist on the aforementioned custom would be allowed only to live out his life pushing a Som Tam cart in Khlong Toey. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Yet another case where a person is found guilty of libel, for telling the truth! I wonder how they came by this brand of libel and defamation that they use here.....very strange. I think when Noppadon received his scholarship, Thaksin was just a twinkle in the political eye of Thailand.The insinuation of lack of loyalty because he received a scholarship is actually quite a nasty one in a Thai context. Irony of ironies, his first "political patron" (according to Wiki) was:http://en.wikipedia....oppadon_Pattama He was President of Thai Students’ Association in Britain 1988-1989. While in Britain he met Chuan Leekpai, leader of the Democrat Party, who became his political patron. Returning to Thailand, Noppadon practised law in Bangkok and became Chuan's secretary during his period as Leader of the Opposition in 1995-97 He's a lawyer, whoever pays the bills gets his services I guess, although the whole story has a certain Star Wars," I am your father Luke", feel to it. "He's a lawyer, whoever pays the bills gets his services" Indeed very true. I have met ladies working in bars in Thailand with the same high ethical standards. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KarstenBoAndersen Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 If they was in Europe, no one would had cared ! This is getting crazy ! But good as a business owner in Thailand, does anyone say something bad about me, i can get them locked up very easy ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpov Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Whatever happened to the 20 odd years sentence he received a while back for fraud during the 90's. Gave dodgy financial information to secure a loan that his media empire is today based on. Wiped under carpet, old age etc ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Whatever happened to the 20 odd years sentence he received a while back for fraud during the 90's. Gave dodgy financial information to secure a loan that his media empire is today based on. Wiped under carpet, old age etc ? He is a model altruism selflessly representing his own interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallGuyJohninBKK Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Libel in Thailand should NOT be a criminal offense with jail sentences, period. It ought to be a civil offense with monetary damages and injunctive relief. And the truthfulness of a person's comments ought to be a legitimate defense, which it seems not to be here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dap Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 What? No suspended sentence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 so is he actually in jail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai at Heart Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) Libel in Thailand should NOT be a criminal offense with jail sentences, period. It ought to be a civil offense with monetary damages and injunctive relief. And the truthfulness of a person's comments ought to be a legitimate defense, which it seems not to be here. How is the opinion that sondhi gave a proveable truthful fact? Edited September 19, 2012 by Thai at Heart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellodolly Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 They really are scraping the barrel now. "Old age and altruism". You're sure they didn't have in mind " Old age and Autism " Libel in Thailand should NOT be a criminal offense with jail sentences, period. It ought to be a civil offense with monetary damages and injunctive relief. And the truthfulness of a person's comments ought to be a legitimate defense, which it seems not to be here. Can't have fines the poor would not be able to pay them if they spoke what they really believed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nurofiend Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 how many convictions has sondhi now at this stage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surangw Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Next it will be changed to house arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarangTalk Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 And the truthfulness of a person's comments ought to be a legitimate defense, which it seems not to be here. The whole house of cards would come tumbling down then; language, culture, history... they might actually have to tell the truth about something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moe666 Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Yet another case where a person is found guilty of libel, for telling the truth! I wonder how they came by this brand of libel and defamation that they use here.....very strange. I think when Noppadon received his scholarship, Thaksin was just a twinkle in the political eye of Thailand.The insinuation of lack of loyalty because he received a scholarship is actually quite a nasty one in a Thai context. Irony of ironies, his first "political patron" (according to Wiki) was:http://en.wikipedia....oppadon_Pattama He was President of Thai Students’ Association in Britain 1988-1989. While in Britain he met Chuan Leekpai, leader of the Democrat Party, who became his political patron. Returning to Thailand, Noppadon practised law in Bangkok and became Chuan's secretary during his period as Leader of the Opposition in 1995-97 He's a lawyer, whoever pays the bills gets his services I guess, although the whole story has a certain Star Wars," I am your father Luke", feel to it. "He's a lawyer, whoever pays the bills gets his services" Indeed very true. I have met ladies working in bars in Thailand with the same high ethical standards. At least you get something from the ladies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerrysteve Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Had he Murdered someone the sentence would have been lighter..in the front door and out the back door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webfact Posted September 19, 2012 Author Share Posted September 19, 2012 Update: Sondhi loses libel appeal, but jail term reduced The Nation BANGKOK: -- People's Alliance for Democracy leader Sondhi Limthongkul yesterday had his guilty verdict for libel confirmed in an appellate review - although his jail term was cut by half to three months. In the sentence reduction, the Court of Appeals cited Sondhi's old age and altruism as grounds for leniency, saying he did not seek self-serving gain by defaming legal adviser Noppadon Pattama. Following the reading of the appellate decision, the defence sought and received Bt100,000 bail pending a final review by the Supreme Court.Sondhi made his critical remarks against Noppadon in 2007, portraying the legal adviser as unworthy of a royal scholarship recipient because he worked for former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Noppadon sued for libel, naming Sondhi, another five individuals and two media outlets on the list of defendants. The lower court handed down its decision in 2009, finding Sondhi guilty of defamation. It sentenced Sondhi to a jail term of six months. Two media outlets, Thaiday Dot Com and Manager Media Group, were liable to pay Bt20,000 in fines each for disseminating libelous remarks. Sondhi, as well as the two media outlets, were to publish a summary of the verdict in three national newpapers, Thai Rath, Matichon and Daily News, for seven consecutive days. The charges against five individual defendants were dismissed due to reasonable doubt about their involvement in the case. In the appellate review, the higher court stood by the guilty verdict and cautioned Sondhi for smearing Noppadon instead of relying on legal proceedings to decide if his [Noppadon's] work for Thaksin was unlawful as claimed. The judicial decision rejected the defence's plea for suspending the jail term, arguing the punishment should serve as a deterrent for a repeat offence. It decided, however, to grant the sentence reduction. The penalty for publishing a summary of the verdict was cut to three days. And charges pertaining to the two media outlets were dismissed, including the fines of Bt20,000 each. -- The Nation 2012-09-20 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