I have missed something, has he taken her house, land, car and bank account. She was 38 he sure did not take anything else.

don't tell me you 'believe the papers'? especially here? that would be nearly as bad as saying you believe the posters on TVF lol

I kind of want to believe you and your a TV poster.

What could be the hypothetical reason for not pursuing this first in legal system? There are all sorts of dusty laws that could be trotted out to pursue this guy.

Why go the non legal publicity route? Did he break a US law only?

my advice would be to 'reserve judgement' whether TVF poster or not - did you? those familiar with the issue say it's not so much a technically legal concern more one of being allegedly 'conned' with the help of a Thai 'secretary' through Thai language newspapers. I am not that close to it as I know neither of them but I report what I was told. My point is more don't jump to condemn.

don't tell me you 'believe the papers'? especially here? that would be nearly as bad as saying you believe the posters on TVF lol

I kind of want to believe you and your a TV poster.

What could be the hypothetical reason for not pursuing this first in legal system? There are all sorts of dusty laws that could be trotted out to pursue this guy.

Why go the non legal publicity route? Did he break a US law only?

my advice would be to 'reserve judgement' whether TVF poster or not - did you? those familiar with the issue say it's not so much a technically legal concern more one of being allegedly 'conned' with the help of a Thai 'secretary' through Thai language newspapers. I am not that close to it as I know neither of them but I report what I was told. My point is more don't jump to condemn.

What online news sites would you recommend to learn more? I can't seem to find anything on Thai Rath.

I seriously doubt the accusers legal team is a reliable source of the unvarnished truth either.

Perhaps they are trying to pressure the US to get Thailand to enact some new laws to protect women.

Why the secretary or guy are not culpable under the existing suppressed freedom of speech legal system is beyond me.

Had sex with the promise of marriage, the guy broke his word?

Might as well lock up about 99.9% of the male population if breaking a promise is a crime.

LOL! Side note - that is an established REAL crime over here in South Korea! If you Promis a girl marriage, then have sex, then break up - you can goto jail! LOL!

Even if there were a legit complaint to be made against "Mr. Dean" why would this be the concern of the American embassy?

Wow. An American man's reputation defamed on this forum by an anonymous new member! Sounds like GOSSIP to me.

BTW, if you think this statement is too strong, perhaps it is.

But consider how YOU would feel if some anonymous forum poster started talking outrageous trash talk about you and provided no evidence of its verity.

Its PATHETIC and laughable

Both has concentual sex and then it did not work out

ITS NOT ILLEGAL TO CHANGE YOUR MIND

Move on lady

Wow. An American man's reputation defamed on this forum by an anonymous new member! Sounds like GOSSIP to me.

Or the truth.May be she didn't like the taste of his chewing gum.

Wow. An American man's reputation defamed on this forum by an anonymous new member! Sounds like GOSSIP to me.

Or the truth.May be she didn't like the taste of his chewing gum.

Perhaps it is and perhaps it isn't. But delivered this way without evidence by an anonymous source it is still GOSSIP by definition.

Jingthing -

Points taken, but you can actually check the court records.

And yes I am anonymous but he has ruined the life of a few people and I do not intend to be his next victim.

Incidentally you are also anonymous - to me. You might be the man himself????

From Only Fools and Horses

Del Boy:
[Rodney is looking for crimes to report at the tenants' meeting]
Well, why don't you tell them what happened to poor Rita Alldridge then?

Rodney:
Yes! Good idea! What happened to Rita Alldridge then?

Del Boy:
Last Friday night she was indecently assaulted over by the adventure playground.

Rodney:
No! Did she report it?

Del Boy:
Yeah, I saw her this morning, she'd just been down the police station.

Rodney:
Right. There you are, you see; that's exactly the sort of thing... hang
on a minute, if this happened on Friday night, how come it's taken her
'til Wednesday to report it?

Del Boy:
Because she didn't know she'd been indecently assaulted until this morning when the bloke's cheque bounced.

How many guys do you think she fleeced before "James Dean". That's funny. Not even an original name.

At 38 she was probably thinking she is running out of time to fleece more suckers and was pissed she wasted a free swing in the crib with this guy. Fat chance in US Embassy. But then again 98% of the employees are Thai.

Libellous post removed

I would love to hear the guy's side of the story

Unadvertised kilo's or faint hint of bait smell?

I wonder has a Thai guy ever been sued for similar and the courts found for the woman?

I guess the extortion potential of a Elementary school owner was just too powerful.

What if he made Elementary school story was made up also? Oh snap !

Actually, you bring up an excellent point about the Thai guy subject.

There seems to be a new move over the last few years to create a different standard for foreign men in such cases. Any promises made to a Thai woman is like a verbal contract. There are female lawyers taking these cases pro bono to try to set a precedent. I know of several situations where these pro bono lawyers take on seemingly groundless cases.

On the other hand, Thai guys do the same and much worse and it's written off as Thai culture.

I've decided to register with Thaivisa just to answer this topic.

Some people have asked for more information before jumping to conclusions - so maybe this will help.

The guy has been in Thailand for less than 3 years but is involved in at least 5 court cases to my personal knowledge. None of these are in anyway similar to this matter but concern defamation and fraud. He has also threatened others with court cases.

Probably the Embassy route is just for publicity but I believe that police reports have been made and these often lead to court hearings.

What is the Legal Statute a court would hear?

Libellous post removed

Is the definition of Libel in Thailand different from rest of the world?

I think libel needs to involve a statement of purported fact.. Not an opinion.

Isn't the media stunt at the consulate without formal charges Defamation? or are they dodging this by giving him a nickname?

It sounds like they were trying to get uproar to assist in getting charges.

Any sound legal opinions?

...

Incidentally you are also anonymous - to me. You might be the man himself????

Indeed. I will marry you. I am very rich. The sexy time is now. Please don't tell my embassy.

Had sex with the promise of marriage, the guy broke his word?

Might as well lock up about 99.9% of the male population if breaking a promise is a crime.

LOL! Side note - that is an established REAL crime over here in South Korea! If you Promis a girl marriage, then have sex, then break up - you can goto jail! LOL!

well, that USED to be true...but in 2009, South Korea ruled that this was no longer a crime...

...

Incidentally you are also anonymous - to me. You might be the man himself????

Indeed. I will marry you. I am very rich. The sexy time is now. Please don't tell my embassy.

Hang on JT, that's what you promised ME last week.

There is more at stake now; the freedom to keep a promise for all American people. I feel the embassy should really be involved now.

Libellous post removed

Is the definition of Libel in Thailand different from rest of the world?

I think libel needs to involve a statement of purported fact.. Not an opinion.

Isn't the media stunt at the consulate without formal charges Defamation? or are they dodging this by giving him a nickname?

It sounds like they were trying to get uproar to assist in getting charges.

Any sound legal opinions?

presumably if he is innocent he can sue her for defamation What posters cannot do is 'wager' that she is using her complaint as leverage in another case or that her lawyer 'sought her out' (unless her complaint is false - and we don't know that) that is libelous. Don't forget to say something is an 'opinion' does not, in law, make it so and I would urge supreme caution as this 'story' is gathering momentum (it is in the 'other' national newspaper today, in Khao Sod and on two TV shows)

not Thai law but:

The law of defamation varies from state to state, but there are some generally accepted rules. If you believe you are have been "defamed," to prove it you usually have to show there's been a statement that is all of the following:

• published
• false
• injurious
• unprivileged

Let's look at each of these elements in detail.

1. First, the "statement" can be spoken, written, pictured, or even gestured. Because written statements last longer than spoken statements, most courts, juries, and insurance companies consider libel more harmful than slander.

2. "Published" means that a third party heard or saw the statement -- that is, someone other than the person who made the statement or the person the statement was about. "Published" doesn't necessarily mean that the statement was printed in a book -- it just needs to have been made public through television, radio, speeches, gossip, or even loud conversation. Of course, it could also have been written in magazines, books, newspapers, leaflets, or on picket signs.

3. A defamatory statement must be false -- otherwise it's not considered damaging. Even terribly mean or disparaging things are not defamatory if the shoe fits. Most opinions don't count as defamation because they can't be proved to be objectively false. For instance, when a reviewer says, "That was the worst book I've read all year," she's not defaming the author, because the statement can't be proven to be false.

4. The statement must be "injurious." Since the whole point of defamation law is to take care of injuries to reputation, those suing for defamation must show how their reputations were hurt by the false statement -- for example, the person lost work; was shunned by neighbors, friends, or family members; or was harassed by the press. Someone who already had a terrible reputation most likely won't collect much in a defamation suit.

5. Finally, to qualify as a defamatory statement, the offending statement must be "unprivileged." Under some circumstances, you cannot sue someone for defamation even if they make a statement that can be proved false. For example, witnesses who testify falsely in court or at a deposition can't be sued. (Although witnesses who testify to something they know is false could theoretically be prosecuted for perjury.) Lawmakers have decided that in these and other situations, which are considered "privileged," free speech is so important that the speakers should not be constrained by worries that they will be sued for defamation. Lawmakers themsleves also enjoy this privilege: They aren't liable for statements made in the legislative chamber or in official materials, even if they say or write things that would otherwise be defamatory.

I want to add that I consider myself a feminist. You do not need a vagina to be a feminist. Being a feminist includes thinking adult women are strong and can think and make adult decisions for themselves. Those decisions include having consensual sex and taking responsibility for the trust decisions they make regarding their sex partners. Just like men. Accepting the consequences of these adult decisions even the STUPID ones. Now if we were talking about some kind of rape scenario, this would be different, but there was no mention of that. It would also be different if an adult woman had some kind of severe mental impairment. Again not mentioned in this case.

Interesting :

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/damages-for-breach-of-promise-to-marry.html

It's quite plausible that this could be a diversion tactic, about something completely different. It certainly portraits the person in a specific way.

But we don't know the fact.

I want to add that I consider myself a feminist. You do not need a vagina to be a feminist. Being a feminist includes thinking adult women are strong and can think and make adult decisions for themselves. Those decisions include having consensual sex and taking responsibility for the trust decisions they make regarding their sex partners. Just like men. Accepting the consequences of these adult decisions even the STUPID ones. Now if we were talking about some kind of rape scenario, this would be different, but there was no mention of that. It would also be different if an adult woman had some kind of severe mental impairment. Again not mentioned in this case.

I've heard it all now. A gay guy calls himself a 'feminist' yet supports the 'idea' (not saying this is what happened in this case) that hetro guys can put in adverts via a Thai 'secretary' via Thai language newspapers and ply girls with drinks and promises of marriage for... ? this is feminism - I don't think so

edit: anyway we veer off-topic - we can discuss 'feminism' as it relates to 'male hunters' another thread - back OT

In all fairness, I think the point was what is morally despicable is not necessarily illegal, which makes seeking remedy rather pointless. The US embassy does not really function as a Court of Morals either.

Interesting :

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/damages-for-breach-of-promise-to-marry.html

That is interesting. Sources tell me it is this aspect - the alleged 'duping' which is at the crux of it.

If this guy has not 'done wrong' he can sue her for defamation and if she is lying he should do so!!! he certainly has enough evidence - this has a way to run

In all fairness, I think the point was what is morally despicable is not necessarily illegal, which makes seeking remedy rather pointless.

well that is a very fair point

I suspect that this 'could' be considered unethical and a set-up but not, technically, illegal - but let's see because we are all just speculating as none of us know, directly, the parties involved - I just know a friend of the lady

Interesting :

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/damages-for-breach-of-promise-to-marry.html

That is interesting. Sources tell me it is this aspect - the alleged 'duping' which is at the crux of it.

If this guy has not 'done wrong' he can sue her for defamation and if she is lying he should do so!!! he certainly has enough evidence - this has a way to run

In the west anyway a promise is a unilateral contract and not enforceable.

If the girl gave him 'consideration' such as money or a item of measurable value then it could be considered an enforceable bilateral contract.

Perhaps intimate activity is being counted as 'consideration'

Does anyone know when this event took place? Are we talking recently?

I've heard it all now.

...

Perhaps you don't get out much?

I've heard it all now.

...

Perhaps you don't get out much?

haha maybe and happy to debate what feminism is and is not another time (which, actually, is a very interesting debate). Back OT