britmaveric Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Blackmailing foreigner caught out [moderation snip]Picture removed /Meadish[/moderation snip] Bar worker Miss Sangduan Sangmate did not hesitate to go to the tourist police after finding that her erst while boyfriend had made unflattering references to her on the internet. Embarrassing pictures were also posted. The entries apparently advised visitors to Thailand not to patronise the bar where she worked. The internet site in question was visited by 200,108 foreigners. Mr Brett Antony Patterson, an Australian national, eventually returned to Thailand and set up a meeting between himself and the girl who had lost face. Police were also there in a stakeout position and descended mightily on him. It transpired that the Aussie had become annoyed after Miss Sangduan refused to stay with him for several days after a one night stand. She said he was not her cup of tea and had dished out insufficient money. He was charged with an attempt to defraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hm1973 Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Hey Brit, Who wrote that.......and I thought my grammar skills were poor...wow!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PATTAYAPUNTER Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 Very handsome man. I wonder which website it was. Any guesses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naka Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 (edited) Hey Brit,Who wrote that.......and I thought my grammar skills were poor...wow!!! Ok then ... Which part displeased you ? Share with us. Ahh ... I see ... you were online at 03:17 (not drunk, but had been drinking) Naka. Edited October 19, 2006 by naka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libya 115 Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 I didn't know Johnny Vegas was Australian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREM-R Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 Is the title of this thread misleading? Definition of Blackmail: Blackmail is threatening to reveal substantially true information about a person to the public, a family member, or associates unless a monetary demand is met. This information is usually of an embarrassing or damaging nature. As the information is substantially true, revealing the information is not criminal, the crime is demanding money to withhold it. The news item makes no reference to demands for money so was it Blackmail? Why were the police involved? Because the girl "lost face"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astral Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 I agree. I see not evidence of fraud or blackmail here. She just lost face, which is a very bad thing to do to a Thai. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattaya_Fox Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 Well what a stupid thing to do. If what we read is correct he not only posted unflattering references about the lady and embarrassing pictures but also advised people not to frequent the bar which would have probably resulted in loss of income to the bar. He then stupidly arranged a meet with his ex girlfriend. I think that this guy will learn a lesson which he will not forget in a hurry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khutan Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 ....[moderation snip]Picture removed /Meadish[/moderation snip]........ Mr Brett Antony Patterson, an Australian national..... Funny he also looks a bit like "Sir Les Patterson" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREM-R Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 It transpired that the Aussie had become annoyed after Miss Sangduan refused to stay with him for several days after a one night stand. She said he was not her cup of tea and had dished out insufficient money. He was charged with an attempt to defraud. So let this be a lesson to all who use the bars "take away service" if you don't pay the girl sufficently for her services she is entitled to call the BiB and they can charge you with "attempting to defraud". Errrrr.... but wait, just a minute, isn't being paid to have sex PROSTITUTION. Errr.. isn't PROSTITUTION illegal in Thailand.... Should the headline read.... Police assist prostitute in illegal act. Errr. isn't that pimping? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soic Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 I agree.I see not evidence of fraud or blackmail here. She just lost face, which is a very bad thing to do to a Thai. It depends if he was demanding sex in return for removing the postings. Blackmail can be over paperclips or anything that can be considered a value to someone. I don't think there are enough facts to pass judgement. I don't think that the police would have acted just because a bargirl "lost face". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noel Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 So what is the source of this journalistic gem? Apart from the headline not matching the content which has become an industry standard, it is far too well written to be from the ususal sensationalistic shit bucket... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casanundra Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 The reason why he is in trouble is because what he did contravened Section 34 of the Thai Constitution law which states: "A person's family rights, dignity, reputation or his right to privacy shall be protected. The assertion or circulation of a statement or picture in any manner whatsoever to the public, which violates or affects a person's family rights, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy, shall not be made except for the case which is beneficial to the public." Maybe he thought it was beneficial to the public to name and shame her but the Thai authorities clearly had a different notion on this intepretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noel Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 The reason why he is in trouble is because what he did contravened Section 34 of the Thai Constitution law which states: "A person's family rights, dignity, reputation or his right to privacy shall be protected. The assertion or circulation of a statement or picture in any manner whatsoever to the public, which violates or affects a person's family rights, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy, shall not be made except for the case which is beneficial to the public." Maybe he thought it was beneficial to the public to ame and shame her but the Thai authorities clearly had a different notion on this intepretation. I agree that that would be a tad too much for a headline, but it hardly amounts to blackmail... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 19, 2006 Author Share Posted October 19, 2006 Hey Brit,Who wrote that.......and I thought my grammar skills were poor...wow!!! Woops posted in a hurry.... Due Credit goes to: Pattaya Today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unforgiven Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 It transpired that the Aussie had become annoyed after Miss Sangduan refused to stay with him for several days after a one night stand. She said he was not her cup of tea and had dished out insufficient money. He was charged with an attempt to defraud.So let this be a lesson to all who use the bars "take away service" if you don't pay the girl sufficently for her services she is entitled to call the BiB and they can charge you with "attempting to defraud". Errrrr.... but wait, just a minute, isn't being paid to have sex PROSTITUTION. Errr.. isn't PROSTITUTION illegal in Thailand.... Should the headline read.... Police assist prostitute in illegal act. Errr. isn't that pimping? how frickin true !! what a joke ,the bib are so corupt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxm88 Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 The reason why he is in trouble is because what he did contravened Section 34 of the Thai Constitution law which states: Hmmm... I don't see anything about "family rights, dignity, reputation or his right to privacy shall be protected" in the Constitution. From http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/02...es_30015101.php Article 34. For the purpose of maintaining public order and national security, there shall be the Council for National Security consisting of members as stipulated by the 24th announcement of the Council for Democratic Reform dated September 29 B.E. 2549. The Chairman of the Council for National Security appoints no more than 15 members of the Council for National Security. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 19, 2006 Author Share Posted October 19, 2006 In the ladies defense, it wasnt very nice of the lad to post her photos on the web and abuse her. Pretty stupid of him actually - prob told her what he did as well. How else would she have known about it?? Som Nam Na Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAZZELL Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 The reason why he is in trouble is because what he did contravened Section 34 of the Thai Constitution law which states: "A person's family rights, dignity, reputation or his right to privacy shall be protected. The assertion or circulation of a statement or picture in any manner whatsoever to the public, which violates or affects a person's family rights, dignity, reputation or the right of privacy, shall not be made except for the case which is beneficial to the public." Maybe he thought it was beneficial to the public to name and shame her but the Thai authorities clearly had a different notion on this intepretation. Source???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casanundra Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 CURRENT THAI Law is governed as follows: Kingdom of Thailand Constitution Sections 34, 37 and 58 of the 1997 Constitution protect, respectively, rights to dignity and privacy, the freedom of communication, and the right to access personal information held by State agencies. Data Protection Laws Computer Crime Law approved with revisions, May 2002 Electronic Transactions Bill, April 2002 Thai information law, the Official Information Act, B.E. 2540 (1997)(OIA) Official Information Act, 1997 Source: Faculty of Law Chulalongkorn University who I think may know a little more about the law than the Nation newspaper rag don't ya think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bkkandrew Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Anyone get the URL of the offending website?? Is it still up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie eagle Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Anybody got the link to the original story I can't find it on the Pattaya Today website, thanks EE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 Anybody got the link to the original story I can't find it on the Pattaya Today website, thanks EE http://www.pattayatoday.net/index.php?acti...ews&id=1952 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie eagle Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 (edited) thanks Britmaveric ... its an interesting post and one with ramifications for those in other forums who post BG pictures Edited October 20, 2006 by eddie eagle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 thanks Britmaveric ... its an interesting post and one with ramifications for those in other forums who post BG pictures Would you be refering to losers.com by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawtilus Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 Why 'offending' website ? The pics were not that interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 21, 2006 Author Share Posted October 21, 2006 Why 'offending' website ? The pics were not that interesting. what website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BROWNY Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 Why 'offending' website ? The pics were not that interesting. what website? Barladies by any chance ? It is mysteriously unavailable at the moment. Not that I ever look at it, much, erm..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 22, 2006 Author Share Posted October 22, 2006 Why 'offending' website ? The pics were not that interesting. what website? Barladies by any chance ? It is mysteriously unavailable at the moment. Not that I ever look at it, much, erm..... It was banned sometime ago by the censors - so I heard!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiG16 Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 well fxm is looking a the junta rule (I dont know if constitution is the right word for that) but what casanundra posted is very correct. however depending on when the event took place, if it was after 19sept, then ofcourse the 1997 constitution cannot be applied 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