Loei mining firm seeking to sue 15-year-old schoolgirl

[lucky11]

Hopefully the international press will air this

Why?

[ggt]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

[lucky11]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

[Orac]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

This company has a history of using the dubious defamation laws in Thailand to silence criticism and were suspended from the SET in the past.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/558689-australian-businesswoman-arrested-in-thailand-for-criminal-defamation/

[ggt]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

What is it you did not understand about this statement? "if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway..." I never said or intimated that the river was polluted...you need to go to a remedial reading class...

[Artisi]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

Think you will find that ggt said "if" - not have, as you inferred.

[farmerjo]

I worked there for 18 months back around 2007,no problems then,

It's changed hands since then,

[HannahD]

It'll no doubt be thrown out of court. But this brave young girl will almost certainly never speak up again in future.

The mine company is the lowest of the low. They themselves should be fined and ordered to compensate the girl when its found she did nothing wrong

Just maybe, the mining company has not polluted the local river and is within it's right to sue the girl.

However, if it can be proven that pollution has taken place then she can counter sue them for the damage caused to the environment affecting peoples lives adversely.

Are posters implying that this legislation is exclusive to Thailand and not going on in courts all over the world - especially in the US!!

How preposterous is it that someone who left a pub drunk as a skunk punched someone in the face for no good reason at all, ending up suing the bar for serving him too many drinks!! He won the case.

Here is just some of the litigation on the subject.

• Many states hold commercial vendors of alcohol, such as bars, taverns and package stores responsible for injury caused by drunk patrons
• Laws in most states require the injured person suing a commercial alcohol vendor to prove that the serving of alcohol was a "proximate cause" of the injury
• Commercial vendors are liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated customer if they serve liquor to him after he was visibly intoxicated

Shame on the US for having such stupid laws!!

It is called the "Dram Shop Act" and was established in England centuries ago. The US inherited it from England along with its entire legal system (except in Louisiana.)

[puffy]

It'll no doubt be thrown out of court. But this brave young girl will almost certainly never speak up again in future.

The mine company is the lowest of the low. They themselves should be fined and ordered to compensate the girl when its found she did nothing wrong

Just maybe, the mining company has not polluted the local river and is within it's right to sue the girl.

However, if it can be proven that pollution has taken place then she can counter sue them for the damage caused to the environment affecting peoples lives adversely.

Are posters implying that this legislation is exclusive to Thailand and not going on in courts all over the world - especially in the US!!

How preposterous is it that someone who left a pub drunk as a skunk punched someone in the face for no good reason at all, ending up suing the bar for serving him too many drinks!! He won the case.

Here is just some of the litigation on the subject.

• Many states hold commercial vendors of alcohol, such as bars, taverns and package stores responsible for injury caused by drunk patrons
• Laws in most states require the injured person suing a commercial alcohol vendor to prove that the serving of alcohol was a "proximate cause" of the injury
• Commercial vendors are liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated customer if they serve liquor to him after he was visibly intoxicated

Shame on the US for having such stupid laws!!

Yes serving a drunk more alcohol can easily be compared with suing a fifteen year old girl for some school activity.

In most countries defamation is also a civil matter and not a criminal one.

[lucky11]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

This company has a history of using the dubious defamation laws in Thailand to silence criticism and were suspended from the SET in the past.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/558689-australian-businesswoman-arrested-in-thailand-for-criminal-defamation/

Then she has nothing to worry about. If they are indeed polluting the river then all they have done is brought attention upon their activities in highlighting it with this case. In other words, they haven't done themselves any favours as it will be investigated now and she will be deemed an eco-warrior if pollution is proved!!

If however, they are not polluting then this company has every right to sue her for defaming them. Fair enough?

[lucky11]

It'll no doubt be thrown out of court. But this brave young girl will almost certainly never speak up again in future.

The mine company is the lowest of the low. They themselves should be fined and ordered to compensate the girl when its found she did nothing wrong

Just maybe, the mining company has not polluted the local river and is within it's right to sue the girl.

However, if it can be proven that pollution has taken place then she can counter sue them for the damage caused to the environment affecting peoples lives adversely.

Are posters implying that this legislation is exclusive to Thailand and not going on in courts all over the world - especially in the US!!

How preposterous is it that someone who left a pub drunk as a skunk punched someone in the face for no good reason at all, ending up suing the bar for serving him too many drinks!! He won the case.

Here is just some of the litigation on the subject.

• Many states hold commercial vendors of alcohol, such as bars, taverns and package stores responsible for injury caused by drunk patrons
• Laws in most states require the injured person suing a commercial alcohol vendor to prove that the serving of alcohol was a "proximate cause" of the injury
• Commercial vendors are liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated customer if they serve liquor to him after he was visibly intoxicated

Shame on the US for having such stupid laws!!

Yes serving a drunk more alcohol can easily be compared with suing a fifteen year old girl for some school activity.

In most countries defamation is also a civil matter and not a criminal one.

With accusations such as this, it is a bit more than a school activity.

[lucky11]

It'll no doubt be thrown out of court. But this brave young girl will almost certainly never speak up again in future.

The mine company is the lowest of the low. They themselves should be fined and ordered to compensate the girl when its found she did nothing wrong

Just maybe, the mining company has not polluted the local river and is within it's right to sue the girl.

However, if it can be proven that pollution has taken place then she can counter sue them for the damage caused to the environment affecting peoples lives adversely.

Are posters implying that this legislation is exclusive to Thailand and not going on in courts all over the world - especially in the US!!

How preposterous is it that someone who left a pub drunk as a skunk punched someone in the face for no good reason at all, ending up suing the bar for serving him too many drinks!! He won the case.

Here is just some of the litigation on the subject.

• Many states hold commercial vendors of alcohol, such as bars, taverns and package stores responsible for injury caused by drunk patrons
• Laws in most states require the injured person suing a commercial alcohol vendor to prove that the serving of alcohol was a "proximate cause" of the injury
• Commercial vendors are liable for injuries caused by an intoxicated customer if they serve liquor to him after he was visibly intoxicated

Shame on the US for having such stupid laws!!

It is called the "Dram Shop Act" and was established in England centuries ago. The US inherited it from England along with its entire legal system (except in Louisiana.)

I haven't checked, I'll take your word for it, but I cannot for the life of me understand why these centuries old laws have not been repealed!!

That is besides the polnt though, these laws still exist and are used in ludicrous cases that make no sense or reason, often successfully, in both England and the US.

Back to the topic, this company, justified or not, are using the laws of the land to sue this girl for defamation. As I have mentioned in previous posts, it could well back fire on them in bringing this matter to the attention of the authorities as this will initiate an investigation to see if pollution of this river has indeed occurred in order to substantiate whether they have been defamed by this girl.

[lucky11]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

What is it you did not understand about this statement? "if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway..." I never said or intimated that the river was polluted...you need to go to a remedial reading class...

Then what's all the fuss about?

I think that the defamation law is a bit more substantial than a "questionable law to muzzle it's citizens" though and it is very much a necessary law otherwise people could say anything they want about anybody/anything whether true or false and get away with it. Do you think that would be a wise thing?

Just think what lies I could tell about the neighbour who plays loud music until midnight despite my pleas for him to stop. I could tell his best friend that "did you know that when you are at work, he pops in to your house for a steamy session with your wife, how do I know this? it's because of the squeals of delight for hours on end" and her begging for more!! Get my point?

[DrTuner]

Thailand's deformation laws

Well, yes, they can be called that too.

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed.

[waldroj]

A PR-disaster for TKL!

Assuming they are not responsible for said contamination, they could have scored real points by publishing that they were trying to educate the girl instead of trying to punish her for her observation.

[tuanku]

The article referenced below has some information lacking in BKP and Nation articles on the people involved with Thung Kham. It also has an account of the conflict so far.

Note the involvement of a military gentleman (who copuld well be a tool of others higher in the food chain) which may account for the clumsy and heavy handed use of the defamation laws. The current military government is not noted for subtlety in using all weapons at its disposal!

Also interesting in the article is the considerable involvement of foreigners, presumably working for Tongkah Harbour.

Thung Kham Company Limited (TKL) — a subsidiary of the Tongkah Harbour Public Company Limited, which has some financial backing from Australia and Germany
In Tongkah Harbour’s 2009 annual general report, then board chairman Pricha Attavipach wrote: “Canals and sumps are lined with high-density plastic encircling the site to contain and reuse rain and surface waters effectively.” Loei provincial industry officials inspected the site and found that while the walls were indeed lined with protective sheeting, the bottoms had not been lined and chemicals could leach into nearby soil and water. The mine was ordered to close down until the problems could be fully investigated and rectified.

“Currently, both Mr Thanawat Timsuwan and [provincial police commander]Maj Gen Sakda Wongsiriyanon act as consultants to the Sermthappaisan Companies Group. Lt Gen Poramet Promnak [a retired military officer]has also claimed that he has close ties with the Timsuwan family [which]has strong influence over the mines in the province …” the AHRC report claims.

Managing director and executive board chairman Wijit Jiemwitkul told Spectrum he had specifically warned the ore buyer not to cause trouble when removing the copper. “No matter what you do, don’t hurt the villagers,” Mr Wijit said he told the man.

.ที่มา http://transbordernews.in.th/home/?p=4609 .

[halloween]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

What is it you did not understand about this statement? "if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway..." I never said or intimated that the river was polluted...you need to go to a remedial reading class...

Perhaps you should join him. At least one report says that she stated that the river water was undrinkable, a far more reaching claim than polluted.

[Bluespunk]

Mining firm scum.

Have a think about where you would be without the mining scum providing the raw materials for just about everything you use...<deleted> comment

The action of suing a 15 year girl is that of scum.

The polluting of the environment is that of scum.

The use of libel laws to cover up the truth or at least a point of view you do not like is that of scum.

Thought enough for you.

[Bluespunk]

Hopefully the international press will air this

Why?

To highlight the very wrongness of what they are doing and hopefully have their action stopped?

Edited December 20, 2015 by Bluespunk

[lucky11]

Hopefully the international press will air this

Why?

To highlight the very wrongness of what they are doing and hopefully have their action stopped?

Do you really think that the International press can stop a legitimate process? The International press will never get to hear about this 'trivial' news.

[lucky11]

Deflecting attention from the main issue here...the pollution of the nearby river...if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway...

There is something amiss in a county that uses questionable laws to muzzle it's citizens...

So you've judged already that it is polluted. Why don't we find out first before passing judgement.

If it is polluted as you have deemed it to be then, as you say, case dropped and they enter a new level that could result in them being forced to pay to have the pollution put right and ceasing their mining operations.

The company is not using questionable laws - they have defamation laws in all countries (at least they should have) to stop people propagating falsities that can cause an immense amount of damage. Would you like it If I said your mother was a heroine dealer and you are not in a position to do anything about it?

What is it you did not understand about this statement? "if the river is tested and is polluted then they have no case anyway..." I never said or intimated that the river was polluted...you need to go to a remedial reading class...

Perhaps you should join him. At least one report says that she stated that the river water was undrinkable, a far more reaching claim than polluted.

It is inadvisable to drink river water as it could contain parasites, bacteria or animal urine that can infect your blood and cause life threatening problems. I doubt that you will find ANY river water that is drinkable other than mountain springs where animals don't graze.

Would you drink water from, say, the Thames, Chao Praya, Missippippi? I wouldn't!!

[Bluespunk]

Hopefully the international press will air this

Why?

To highlight the very wrongness of what they are doing and hopefully have their action stopped?

Do you really think that the International press can stop a legitimate process? The International press will never get to hear about this 'trivial' news.

Legitimate process? Maybe not.

Crass attempt by corporate scum to ruin the life of a 15 year old girl for reporting a view they wish to be stifled because it exposes possible environmental damage caused by unsafe practises? Maybe so.

Trivial to you, but not to those whose lives have been destroyed by pollution.

[lucky11]

They are using the defamation law so please tell me where this is not legitimate according to the laws of Thailand. How do you know they have caused pollution are you privy to the analysis report into the river water's quality?

Unless the mining company can prove that her version of the river being polluted is wrong then she has nothing to worry about.

Storm in a tea cup.

[Bluespunk]

They are using the defamation law so please tell me where this is not legitimate according to the laws of Thailand. How do you know they have caused pollution are you privy to the analysis report into the river water's quality?

Unless the mining company can prove that her version of the river being polluted is wrong then she has nothing to worry about.

Storm in a tea cup.

You might want to read what I said more carefully. I said possible environmental damage that the company is keen not to be discussed, hence their use of defamation laws to stifle any discussion of the event.

Storm in a tea cup? Not for the 15 year old child being persecuted by this company for reporting things they do not want to hear.

Or rather they don't want others to hear.

[lucky11]

They are using the defamation law so please tell me where this is not legitimate according to the laws of Thailand. How do you know they have caused pollution are you privy to the analysis report into the river water's quality?

Unless the mining company can prove that her version of the river being polluted is wrong then she has nothing to worry about.

Storm in a tea cup.

You might want to read what I said more carefully. I said possible environmental damage that the company is keen not to be discussed, hence their use of defamation laws to stifle any discussion of the event.

Storm in a tea cup? Not for the 15 year old child being persecuted by this company for reporting things they do not want to hear.

Or rather they don't want others to hear.

Sorry, I thought that you had said "people's lives had been destroyed by pollution" Oh!! you did!!

Don't you think that the possibility of pollution has been highlighted by this case (not hidden away)? She has achieved her purpose as the river quality must be tested in order to prove defamation and it will be revealed to all-a-sunder - then we will all find out the truth and we can start again with the facts before jumping to conclusions.

She will get over it, it's not a death sentence, maybe it will do her good as it will show what the real world is all about and prepare her for the future. A salient lesson as to what is to come in the big bad world that she lives in.

[Bluespunk]

They are using the defamation law so please tell me where this is not legitimate according to the laws of Thailand. How do you know they have caused pollution are you privy to the analysis report into the river water's quality?

Unless the mining company can prove that her version of the river being polluted is wrong then she has nothing to worry about.

Storm in a tea cup.

You might want to read what I said more carefully. I said possible environmental damage that the company is keen not to be discussed, hence their use of defamation laws to stifle any discussion of the event.

Storm in a tea cup? Not for the 15 year old child being persecuted by this company for reporting things they do not want to hear.

Or rather they don't want others to hear.

Sorry, I thought that you had said "people's lives had been destroyed by pollution" Oh!! you did!!

Don't you think that the possibility of pollution has been highlighted by this case (not hidden away)? She has achieved her purpose as the river quality must be tested in order to prove defamation and it will be revealed to all-a-sunder - then we will all find out the truth and we can start again with the facts before jumping to conclusions.

She will get over it, it's not a death sentence, maybe it will do her good as it will show what the real world is all about and prepare her for the future. A salient lesson as to what is to come in the big bad world that she lives in.

The people around the mine have made this claim and I believe them.

The girl reported this point of view and is being persecuted for it. It's a crass attempt to use defamation laws to stifle debate.

As for the 15 year old girl being fine, glad to see you are so sanguine about this. I hope you are right, I really do.

Teenage years are a turbulent and difficult time for those going through them and pressures can lead to rash actions.

Sometimes tragic ones.

[lucky11]

They are using the defamation law so please tell me where this is not legitimate according to the laws of Thailand. How do you know they have caused pollution are you privy to the analysis report into the river water's quality?

Unless the mining company can prove that her version of the river being polluted is wrong then she has nothing to worry about.

Storm in a tea cup.

You might want to read what I said more carefully. I said possible environmental damage that the company is keen not to be discussed, hence their use of defamation laws to stifle any discussion of the event.

Storm in a tea cup? Not for the 15 year old child being persecuted by this company for reporting things they do not want to hear.

Or rather they don't want others to hear.

Sorry, I thought that you had said "people's lives had been destroyed by pollution" Oh!! you did!!

Don't you think that the possibility of pollution has been highlighted by this case (not hidden away)? She has achieved her purpose as the river quality must be tested in order to prove defamation and it will be revealed to all-a-sunder - then we will all find out the truth and we can start again with the facts before jumping to conclusions.

She will get over it, it's not a death sentence, maybe it will do her good as it will show what the real world is all about and prepare her for the future. A salient lesson as to what is to come in the big bad world that she lives in.

The people around the mine have made this claim and I believe them.

The girl reported this point of view and is being persecuted for it. It's a crass attempt to use defamation laws to stifle debate.

As for the 15 year old girl being fine, glad to see you are so sanguine about this. I hope you are right, I really do.

Teenage years are a turbulent and difficult time for those going through them and pressures can lead to rash actions.

Sometimes tragic ones.

I prefer to believe the GC test results of the water rather than hearsay (a trifle more scientific don't you think).

Oh, come on!! Do you think that she is going to top herself over something like this - stop being so melodramatic!!

Stifle debate? what debate? and how has this companies actions stifled any debate. Are you suggesting that this will stop anyone mentioning the subject again for fear of being picked on and having to face their day in court. If that is the case, then they won't appear to have too many concerns about the matter, not in my book, anyway.

[Bluespunk]

Work with teenagers do you? Seen how they react under stress have you? Well that's good, no worries for this child being persecuted for reporting a view this company doesn't want heard.

A company that is also suing the tv company that made the programme.

A company that is clearly willing to use defamation laws to stifle debate.

Will it work? Doubt it.

Does that mean they won't carry on doing it? Doubt it.

[Artisi]

Hopefully the international press will air this

Why?

To highlight the very wrongness of what they are doing and hopefully have their action stopped?

Do you really think that the International press can stop a legitimate process? The International press will never get to hear about this 'trivial' news.

If it's so trivial why do you spend so much time justifying the actions of the mining company. Seems every second post is one of yours.