Shocker ! ! ! Andrew Drummond Leaving Thailand

[Dogmatix]

Although his vendetta with Drew Noyes got a bit tedious at times and he made himself unpopular at TV, Andrew was a towering figure, compared to his detractors, who took great personal risks to report on injustices done to foreigners in Thailand. The many cases where he personally made a huge difference in seeking justice on behalf of the families of murdered farangs include the Leo Del Pinto murder case and the murders of Vanessa Ascott and Adam Lloyd. I wish him all the best in his new life.

Salve Flying Sporran.

Edited January 25, 2015 by Dogmatix

[Dogmatix]

On the other hand I can live without red shirt sympathising photojournalist Nick Nostitz who has also left Thailand.

[micmichd]

Maybe right, according to Thai laws.

Maybe his lawyer told him that he's about to face a defamation charge pretty soon, and maybe better to leave Thailand, before the question of pleading guilty or pleading not guilty with the risk to be kept in custody would arise.

In this situation, I might also have decided to leave Thailand and move to a country where defamation laws are different.

Edited January 25, 2015 by micmichd

[jacky54]

I wonder whether some of the posters here who demean his professional journalism have been/are the subject of some of his investigations.

Andrew is a professional, investigative journalist of high calibre, with many industry awards for his work. Yes, I've seen typos and syntax errors on his website, but which are quickly corrected and do not detract from the sense of the article.

Never knew he has'many industry awards' what are they? His site did note one for undercover work, one he seems to have been the only recipient of. Please correct if wrong.

[Gang Warily]

Is it really your business to investigate what journalists do after work?

No more so than it was his to investigate, 'expose' and ruin the careers of others for doing no more than he was doing himself.

Whose career did you have in mind. A fake lawyer, a financial scammer, a drug clinic owner dealing drugs, a paedophile running a children's charity? Oh b*gger!

Sorry I should have done them for drinking after hours :-). I missed the story. Actually a few stories developed out of the Love Scene, very interesting people used to go there. But have not been there for years now certainly not since first son was born.

[micmichd]

Sorry, some folks never learn that a even a suspect is innocent as long as he's not convicted in last judicial stage. And any suspect can accuse a journalist for defamation if he's called a criminal. Whether the defendant is then kept in custody after being charged with defamation is another question, but the dilemma is clear: you get out if you plead guilty, or you stay in custody if you plead not guilty.

[phrodan]

Andrew Drummond is a prime example of someone who has wasted their best years in Thailand. I'm happy for him that he has a beautiful family and new life to look forward to in the UK, but he'll realize very soon the magnitude of the mistake he made staying in Thailand as long as he did.

[Robroona]

Is it really your business to investigate what journalists do after work?

No more so than it was his to investigate, 'expose' and ruin the careers of others for doing no more than he was doing himself.

x

Whom do you refer to?

[micmichd]

dragonfly 94's last post.

Maybe overseen the possibility that Andrew might have become a workaholic who couldn't relax after hours and close his ears, sometimes this happens to passionate professionals. Happened also to me, I was a long-distance commuter and worked international banking IT, had a notebook PC with VPN, so my boss found it very comfortable to contact me via email in emergency cases when I had returned home. I used to stay on the "scene" in Old Heidelberg for afterwork chats. It Iis normal that if they only have a handful of experts to contact in emergency cases, they pick the one that is an orph a n and has no family at home. Nowadays I still find it difficult to switch off sometimes, just learned to cope with that situation, by reading my emails or posting in TVF. Andrew might have felt the same, didn't want to waste his time, and maybe started typing on a notebook PC, which might have made him suspicious to some other people. I wouldn't like to be asked what I'm just thinking about, and I wouldn't listen to other peoples' private talks, or watch their touchscreens. Andrew might have run in a trap of misunderstanding, and I hope he can relax at home after work now.

Edited January 26, 2015 by micmichd

[canuckamuck]

dragonfly 94's last post.

Maybe overseen the possibility that Andrew might have become a workaholic who couldn't relax after hours and close his ears, sometimes this happens to passionate professionals. Happened also to me, I was a long-distance commuter and worked international banking IT, had a notebook PC with VPN, so my boss found it very comfortable to contact me via email in emergency cases when I had returned home. I used to stay on the "scene" in Old Heidelberg for afterwork chats. It Iis normal that if they only have a handful of experts to contact in emergency cases, they pick the one that is an orph a n and has no family at home. Nowadays I still find it difficult to switch off sometimes, just learned to cope with that situation, by reading my emails or posting in TVF. Andrew might have felt the same, didn't want to waste his time, and maybe started typing on a notebook PC, which might have made him suspicious to some other people. I wouldn't like to be asked what I'm just thinking about, and I wouldn't listen to other peoples' private talks, or watch their touchscreens. Andrew might have run in a trap of misunderstanding, and I hope he can relax at home after work now.

I am pretty sure Andrew would prefer if you would just drop it rather than creating some imaginary cover story for him.

He has already spoke for himself..

[Jack Mountain]

In Thailand, being an investigating journalist and having a family is not a good combination, finally he found out that ...

[MK1]

The problem with sensationalist journalism is not always whether they tell the truth or not, but sometimes what they leave out and the context of the facts. For example falang diving into a river to save drowning child could be reported as foreigner assaults innocent child. Or, man writing about Mohammed's child bride could turn into man wanting to discuss sex with children. This is the sort of way of working that sold the News of the world and other trash papers. Lets have the truth in exposing wrong doers by all means, but it's best done with the honest truthful facts without the sensationalist twists.

Mmh - never seen that happen before. Have you got a real credible example.

MK 1

Read again - the whipping boys I referred to are Thaivisa and the British Embassy, not myself. The reason I chose to be an independent journalist many years was that I was no longer subject to the whims of newspaper editors. I hope and believe I have impacted on people's lives for the better. Those whom I have affected for the worse has been done with little regret - because that will have impacted on other people for the better.

Then that may explain everything, unless your previous employer was the Murdoch press, you failed to respect your line management newspaper editors of the past who perhaps inadvertently seen you as a risky Journo to begin with. Long live Marta Journalism !

Edited January 26, 2015 by MK1

[micmichd]

Do you mean Marta Hillers, the woman that was charged with "besmirching the honour of German women" and was banned from further publishing?

Edited January 26, 2015 by micmichd

[dragonfly94]

This was the sort of spiteful nonsense that diminished Drummond's work, where where the fake lawyers and boiler room boys here? he even published photos of their kids and wives, barrel scraping or just a 'laugh' or the excuse of the publics right to know, about nothing!

Last night the Flying Sporran was a fly on the wall at the Not-Thai-Visa,Com 10th Anniversary Party in the Castle Howchow Beach Resort Hotel near Khon Kaen. It became the 'Not Thai-Visa' Party when the executives of Thai Visa

http://www.andrew-drummond.com/2012/10/flying-sporran-gatecrashes-not.html

Edited January 27, 2015 by dragonfly94

[micmichd]

Beautiful photos from beautiful women and children in beautiful zones. Just the men's faces look a bit scattered, how come?

Welcome to a multi-cultural party in a multi-cultural country....

[dragonfly94]

As one of the victims with his face smudged out I was not amused.

AD wrote 'Are these people real? I mean, when I went to that party way back when everyone seemed a nerd. But then again as I spoke to no-one I cannot confirm that'

Maybe he should speak to people next time, if he was ever there at all, instead of downing the free drink and running away. The owner of the resort said TV members seemed nice people, but then I expect he had the courage to actually speak to some instead. AD seems to have a poor opinion of TV and members but that has not stopped him signing up under several different names over the years, isn't that a bit 'nerd' like?

[DaddyWarbucks]

Andrew Drummond is a prime example of someone who has wasted their best years in Thailand. I'm happy for him that he has a beautiful family and new life to look forward to in the UK, but he'll realize very soon the magnitude of the mistake he made staying in Thailand as long as he did.

Nonsense!

Drummond didn't waste his best years in Thailand... he thrived here.

He found just what he was looking for in life. Something like the Wild West with the floozies and the rogues.

The time came to get outta Dodge.

[dragonfly94]

If he thrived why did he always have the begging bowl out for donations? Hopefully he was making NI and personal pension contributions or the kids will be in for a hard time. Not easy starting a family at his age.

[DaddyWarbucks]

If he thrived why did he always have the begging bowl out for donations? Hopefully he was making NI and personal pension contributions or the kids will be in for a hard time. Not easy starting a family at his age.

A lot of people and groups solicit donations to carry on their work... nothing unusual there.

More than making big money, I always got the impression that Andrew Drummond was doing what he wanted to do, where he wanted to do it.

[Satcommlee]

If he thrived why did he always have the begging bowl out for donations? Hopefully he was making NI and personal pension contributions or the kids will be in for a hard time. Not easy starting a family at his age.

I wouldn't go as far as to call it a begging bowl..

Intelligent people would understand that these donations were required for the greater good.. Drummond was under a lot of pressure with vexatious litigation etc and bail money being required due to abuse of legal process..

The fact that his cloud sourcing technique was successful just goes to show that his benefactors shared the same vision. They also wanted a Thailand where scam artists and conmen could be held accountable..

I am guessing that most people that donated were legit and respectable businessmen running honest businesses...

If you have ever donated to drummond then you have done a good deed, on a par to giving blood..

[Jessi]

If he thrived why did he always have the begging bowl out for donations? Hopefully he was making NI and personal pension contributions or the kids will be in for a hard time. Not easy starting a family at his age.

I think he is still begging for money,

[phrodan]

Andrew Drummond is a prime example of someone who has wasted their best years in Thailand. I'm happy for him that he has a beautiful family and new life to look forward to in the UK, but he'll realize very soon the magnitude of the mistake he made staying in Thailand as long as he did.

Nonsense!

Drummond didn't waste his best years in Thailand... he thrived here.

He found just what he was looking for in life. Something like the Wild West with the floozies and the rogues.

The time came to get outta Dodge.

Andrew Drummond will be the judge of that - and he is in for multiple shocks over the next few months. One of them will be the general disinterest and disdain for, the time he spent in Thailand. He'll find there's no pot of gold waiting for him at the end of this rainbow.

And lets for a moment assume he is in any way correct about having to leave Thailand in fear for his life - or for that matter in fear of a tidal wave of lawsuits. How about his wife and children? are they never to see their homeland again? or if so - without Daddy in tow?

He's made a complete and utter a*se of it. A guy in his fifties ( I believe ) trying to start a new life in the UK with a young family. <deleted> - loony tune stuff.

[dragonfly94]

I think he's in his early 60's. Should be OK as he will get housing benefit, child benefit, tax credits, free health care, free education for the kids and still be able to work. Less of a worry in a lot of areas back in the UK than in a third world dictatorship. It's never too late to go home, no such thing as burning your bridges as long as you have the airfare.

[evadgib]

If he thrived why did he always have the begging bowl out for donations? Hopefully he was making NI and personal pension contributions or the kids will be in for a hard time. Not easy starting a family at his age.

I think he is still begging for money,

The picture of noise as joker was worth every penny:) Edited January 28, 2015 by evadgib

[phrodan]

I think he's in his early 60's. Should be OK as he will get housing benefit, child benefit, tax credits, free health care, free education for the kids and still be able to work. Less of a worry in a lot of areas back in the UK than in a third world dictatorship. It's never too late to go home, no such thing as burning your bridges as long as you have the airfare.

I'm a bit surprised that he is in his early sixties. Your point is valid - this is more likely to be a run to the UK welfare state than genuinely fleeing death threats.

[Jay Sata]

You know the Asian saying about messing with someone else's rice bowl... AD has ruffled more than a few feathers over the years...

There seems to be an entire segment of old timers that have had it with Thailand and are moving on... Things were always better in the "old days" to these guys... I wish them well where ever they go, because the entire world has changed in the last 20 years and the "old days" are long gone in a lot of places...

We left England almost 30 years ago and it has changed beyond recognition. Within the first 10 years, our visits back home told us we wouldn't want to move back, but over the last 20 years is when the really big changes have come. I hope he is able to settle back home or wherever he moves his family to, and wish him all the best for the future - perhaps as an offshore reporter and then perhaps as someone who can set up some kind of anonymous drop-box for people to send material to.

I think you will find most places in the world have changed in the last 30 years and that certainly goes for. Thailand.

If you want to live in a part of England the world has passed by then rural Norfolk and Suffolk take some beating.

Andrews children will get a good education and I am sure he will have plenty of freelance work.

He can also be more honest hence some of his recent articles.

[mikebike]

A guy in his fifties ( I believe ) trying to start a new life in the UK with a young family. <deleted> - loony tune stuff.

Out of all the things you could have picked to pick-on you chose that? Yeah, how freakin' weird, wacky and loony-tunes - nothing crazier than that... except maybe your thought process.

[phrodan]

A guy in his fifties ( I believe ) trying to start a new life in the UK with a young family. <deleted> - loony tune stuff.

Out of all the things you could have picked to pick-on you chose that? Yeah, how freakin' weird, wacky and loony-tunes - nothing crazier than that... except maybe your thought process.

My thought process is very sound - there's not many men I know that would have put themselves in that position. What doubly condemns this guy is that he has spoken for years about the need to go to the UK, and he waits until he's in his sixties to make the move? absurd. I hope he has pots of money or he's in for a serious shock. He'll find out for himself soon enough.

[Gang Warily]

Andrew Drummond is a prime example of someone who has wasted their best years in Thailand. I'm happy for him that he has a beautiful family and new life to look forward to in the UK, but he'll realize very soon the magnitude of the mistake he made staying in Thailand as long as he did.

Nonsense!

Drummond didn't waste his best years in Thailand... he thrived here.

He found just what he was looking for in life. Something like the Wild West with the floozies and the rogues.

The time came to get outta Dodge.

Andrew Drummond will be the judge of that - and he is in for multiple shocks over the next few months. One of them will be the general disinterest and disdain for, the time he spent in Thailand. He'll find there's no pot of gold waiting for him at the end of this rainbow.

And lets for a moment assume he is in any way correct about having to leave Thailand in fear for his life - or for that matter in fear of a tidal wave of lawsuits. How about his wife and children? are they never to see their homeland again? or if so - without Daddy in tow?

He's made a complete and utter a*se of it. A guy in his fifties ( I believe ) trying to start a new life in the UK with a young family. <deleted> - loony tune stuff.

Wow, I bet you're fun down at the local. My children are British. I am British. I work and always have done for the British media with whom I am in contact on a daily basis. What on earth makes you think I do not know what the situation is in Britain as if I have not been there in 24 years, and what is all this nonsense about the kids never seeing the 'homeland' again. This is quite clearly a site from which people click on to the Daily 'We are all going to hell in a handbasket' Mail to cheer themselves up.

I have been seeing a lot of British youth recently. I'm impressed. Much more well rounded that some of my generation. Most have become disenfranchised with Thailand. I will of course be shocked by the British weather - arctic blizzards on the way - but then again so is the Daily Mail - every year.

[kevin2852]

However he is now situated, Andrew is still liable for prosecution in England under sweeping new changes to the Journalist/leak/privileged Information situation which is putting international journalists making " unprovable allegations " at risk of prosecution by Crown investigators in England, this can also be the result of a complaint from foreign sources being made to the British authorities since these are now regarded as a crime which the British government will not shield Journalists living in England from.

The below is printed from NSBC for your information. Andrew will have to continue to tread very carefully even though he is no longer on-site.

Tom Crook (TC) : Britain’s rights to basic freedom of expression, which writers, journalists and free-speech activists fought for over centuries have been sacrificed and abandoned in the space of a few short disastrous years.

Free speech and the freedom of the press to do its job without fear or favour is one of the most important pillars of a true democracy. But this is in greater danger of being sacrificed than at any time in living memory.

What has happened to British journalism’s proud record of speaking truth to power? There is a shameful litany of ways in which journalists' ability to perform this key role is being compromised and undermined.

Confidential sources and public office

Take the use of sources: in a liberal democracy the unfettered flow of important information to the public is wholly dependent on confidential sources being protected when contacting and communicating with journalists.

Sometimes sources are committing crimes by leaking to journalists and taking that risk may mean they need to be paid for their information. Why is it a crime to pay a public official for information and not a crime to pay anyone else? This is inconsistent, and criminalising the act of rewarding whistle-blowers undermines the protection of sources.

But this notion of source protection has been wrecked by the machinations of News Corporation’s “management and standards committee”, the Metropolitan Police, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Director of Public Prosecution and judiciary.

It would appear thousands of confidential emails between journalists and their sources at The Sun and the former News of the World were accessed in evidence searching by the Metropolitan Police during Operation Elveden – an operation that has cost the public £11.3m so far.

Neither the journalists nor their sources were given any right to oppose this breach of their confidentiality. There was no independent hearing before a judge to decide if their Article 10 rights to free expression under the European Convention on Human Rights would be violated.

The careers and lives of senior police officers have been destroyed for simply making a mobile phone call to a news desk, or allegedly background briefing in a confidential journalist relationship.

The CPS, DPP and judiciary have done nothing to stop sources and journalists being criminally prosecuted for the common law offence of “misconduct in public office”, which has been conjured up and developed since 2007 to replace the old and discredited Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act to criminalise the mere telling of official information. It's sledgehammer force crushed and jailed a Scotland Yard security expert in 2007 for leaking a public interest story published in The Sunday Times.

In 2008 it was applied against a terrified weekly newspaper crime reporter, Sally Murrer, after police had bugged her contact with a source. She was only rescued at Crown Court when the judge stopped her trial for the breach of her Article 10 rights.

Police hacking

Juries are becoming confused and bewildered in trials where they see journalists in the dock for publishing stories they strongly argued were in the public interest. When they can’t agree, the CPS pursues retrials. One MP, Tracey Crouch, observed that the CPS"seems to be pursuing a vendetta“ while a leading media law QC, Gavin Millar, asked: ”What on earth is the criminality?"

It now turns out that the police have been “bugging” and “hacking” into communications between journalists and their whistleblower sources without any independent judicial oversight since at least the millennium.

The government and parliament show no willingness to place police and security/intelligence surveillance of journalist communications under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in the same way that the Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 did – which required a hearing before a judge at which the affected parties were properly represented.

Leveson’s chilling legacy

The deep freeze in public official and police sourcing to journalists was turned arctic by the Leveson inquiry in 2012. Leveson argued for a review of the purposes of journalism protections in PACE and data protection acts to see whether they should be narrowed and constrained. He argued for increasing the criminalising and retributive punishment for journalistic conduct and publication.

The wider context of media freedom is utterly depressing. Leveson, academics and a host of other campaigning organisations such as Hacked Off, The Media Standards Trust and even the journalists union, the NUJ, have come out in favour of a statutory underpinning of press regulation. This extraordinary alliance of interests supports the alternative proposed system of public authority oversight through the medieval executive power of a Royal Charter.

Even worse, the provisions for “publishers of news-related material: damages and costs” in the Crime and Courts Act 2013 punishes those media organisations who stand their ground for freedom from state interference. This appalling authoritarian measure imposes added costs and punitive damages in media litigation to media publishers asserting their basic constitutional freedom to be subject to the rule of law but not subject to regulation and approval by state interference.

The Royal Charter regime is a fundamental breach of the European Convention of Human Rights, English common law and constitutional convention. Article 10.1 of the Human Rights Act, which deals with freedom of expression, explicitly states that this right should be “without interference by public authority”. The only exception is for the regulation and licensing of “broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises”. And importantly, this does not include the press or online media.

Creeping powers

Another wider context of authoritarianism has been the slow sleep-walking into criminal privacy law for media conduct and publication. Not only has there been the development of a civil remedy with costs and damages for publishing truthful information deemed to be “private”. This has been accompanied by criminal legislation for privacy intrusion and publication of truthful though private information. This means prosecution, conviction and punitive sentencing for actions that are also sued over for civil damages.

Criminal libel was abolished in 2009-10 because in the field of media communication and freedom of expression, a double legal jeopardy was seen as generating a chilling effect. Giving journalists and publishers a criminal record and, indeed, sending them to jail for making mistakes in finding information and publishing words seemed disproportionate and authoritarian.

Yet it is extraordinary that the Guardian newspaper, some academics and the country’s political establishment have delighted in campaigning for and establishing this effective double jeopardy in privacy for journalists and media where a civil rememdy for invasion of privacy is backed by criminal offences in the Data Protection Act, RIPA and other legislation.

While it can be accepted that human dignity and honour is being protected, I don’t think enough thought has been given to the social risks of legally prohibiting and criminally prosecuting the publication of truthful and accurate information (as opposed to lies and untruths which are covered by libel laws). So, in the case of phone-hacking, News Corporation paid hundreds of millions of pounds in damages for breaching the privacy of mobile phone messages, but on top of this several of its journalists were criminally prosecuted and, in some cases jailed, in Operation Weeting at a cost of nearly £20m.

Fearful self-censorship

As a result of all this, British journalism is now running scared. Litigation involving libel in privacy has been falling, not because journalists and their publishers are behaving better. The real explanation lies in an industry conking out as a result of losing 50% of its circulation over the past 14 years. Media law and compliance costs have also increased exponentially and are the highest in Europe.

A few isolated commentators are lamenting how self-interest, false consciousness and political tunnel vision are dismantling the worthy and hard-fought reputation that defined us as a country the world looked to for respecting journalistic freedom. It is frightening and disturbing that seeking to publish truthful information that people do not want published, home or abroad – the very basic tenet of journalism – should be mocked as first amendment fundamentalism, which is an intolerant and propagandist turn of phrase that explains the spirit of the times we live in.

Tim Crook, The Conversation - Tim Crook is Reader in Media and Communication (Goldsmiths), Visiting Professor of Broadcast Journalism (Birmingham City University) at Goldsmiths, University of London.

n