Redshirt leader given two years in jail for defamation charge



BANGKOK: -- Redshirt leader Jatuporn Promphan was today sentenced to two years in prison by the Appeals Court after he was found guilty of defaming former prime minister Abhisit Vejjajiva in 2009.

The ruling by the second court today was seen to confirm earlier ruling by the first court that sentenced Jatuporn to two years in jail with no suspended jail sentence for accusing Mr Abhisit of ordering the slaughter of redshirt protesters during the anti-government protest in 2009.

Jatuporn also accused Abhisit of intercepting the attempt to seek Royal pardon for the fugitive premier Thaksin Shinawatra.

At the hearing today, the Appeals Court said criticising politician is the legitimate right of critics but it must be based on facts and for the sake of peace and order of the country.

It then stated it agreed with the first ruling by the Criminal Court to sentence the defendant for two years in prison with no suspended jail sentence.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/redshirt-leader-given-two-years-jail-defamation-charge/


-- Thai PBS 2016-06-10

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

Breaking that Hub of Suspended Jail Sentences?

Excellent, even though it's only 2 years. This vile, inbred mutant is finally put away.

Excellent, even though it's only 2 years. This vile, inbred mutant is finally put away.

I agree that he is a despicable individual, but not on the sentence. I can't help but feel that defamation should be subject to civil remedies alone as it is in many developed countries. Suing for defamation, when often the comments are actually true (not this case), knowing that the person will be subject to criminal penalties, is just wrong.

If the law were changed in such a way such that you could not be sued for stating provable facts about someone, but could only be sued for falsehoods, then perhaps criminal action could be allowed. However, that is not the case in Thailand, telling the truth is not a defence here. As long as the comments can be seen to damage the reputation of someone, then the person who made those comments is in the wrong.

The current defamation laws of Thailand are just used to gag dissent and as a political tool.

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

How many suspended sentences do you get before actually having to serve time? He has had at least one, and possibly two, 6 months incarceration suspended for 2 years, and is currently awaiting prosecution on a string of charges that may see him in for life. Those charges, of course, were delayed by his co-accused being appointed to parliament via PTP's party list, a blatant reward for crimes committed by the UDD mercenary agitators.

Edited June 10, 201610 yr by halloween

About time...

If cases and sentences like this are to have any credibility, there needs to be a major purge of offendors right across the spectrum. Otherwise it's nothing more than cherry picking.

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

In the context of how Jatuporn said what he did, i think the sentence is completely appropriate. He was using his speeches to incite violence and disorder. The lies he told were intended to whip up anger and hatred on a large scale, leading to bloodshed. Regardless of what side of the divide a person is on, they should be punished properly for that, not just a slap on the wrists.

Unsurprising.

Double standards.

Only to be expected from a corrupted and beholden judiciary with debts to pay.

Sadly.

W

No problem. This scumbag will get quite 'ill' shortly and be transferred to Hospital !

Unsurprising.

Double standards.

Only to be expected from a corrupted and beholden judiciary with debts to pay.

Sadly.

W

Equally unsurprising.

Rote response.

Only to be expected from a Thaksin sycophant unable to recognise criminality.

Repeatedly.

H

It's not looking good for Yingluck. Will she be next?

When words fail, the equivalent of 1,000 of them will do just fine:

Unsurprising.

Double standards.

Only to be expected from a corrupted and beholden judiciary with debts to pay.

Sadly.

W

Equally unsurprising.

Rote response.

Only to be expected from a Thaksin sycophant unable to recognise criminality.

Repeatedly.

H

Defamation..Criminality. Only to the ill informed and uneducated.

So killing 9 without a licence is a suspended sentence but stating the truth or calling someone a name is worth 2 years in the klink.

Thailand certainly attracts some imbeciles.

Edited June 10, 201610 yr by Reigntax

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

In the context of how Jatuporn said what he did, i think the sentence is completely appropriate. He was using his speeches to incite violence and disorder. The lies he told were intended to whip up anger and hatred on a large scale, leading to bloodshed. Regardless of what side of the divide a person is on, they should be punished properly for that, not just a slap on the wrists.

But in that case he should have been charged with promoting insurrection or similar charges (I assume there is an equivalent law on the books), not defamation. The country was damaged by his actions, not Abhisit.

I love the smell of reconciliation in the morning. It smells like "VICTORY".

Appeal Court rejects Abhisit's defamation suit against Jatuporn

December 27, 2014 1:00 am

The Appeal Court yesterday rejected a libel suit filed by former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva against red-shirt co-leader Jatuporn Promphan, saying Jatuporn's criticism when Abhisit was prime minister was honestly made.

The plaintiff said on May 10, 2009 that Jatuporn, a leader of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), defamed him in front of 10,000 people through loud speakers at Wat Phai Kiew Temple in Don Muang in Bangkok by calling him a "tyrant" whose "hands are tainted with blood" who deserved to be sentenced to death for killing people.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Appeal-Court-rejects-Abhisits-defamation-suit-agai-30250779.html

During their Bangkok Shutdown protests, the whistle-blowing, clapper-clad yellow horde defamed the opposition constantly. But that was OK I guess.

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

How many suspended sentences do you get before actually having to serve time? He has had at least one, and possibly two, 6 months incarceration suspended for 2 years, and is currently awaiting prosecution on a string of charges that may see him in for life. Those charges, of course, were delayed by his co-accused being appointed to parliament via PTP's party list, a blatant reward for crimes committed by the UDD mercenary agitators.

There should be no suspended sentence because defamation should not be a criminal offence to begin with, regardless who is in power.

I love the smell of reconciliation in the morning. It smells like "VICTORY".

Appeal Court rejects Abhisit's defamation suit against Jatuporn

December 27, 2014 1:00 am

The Appeal Court yesterday rejected a libel suit filed by former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva against red-shirt co-leader Jatuporn Promphan, saying Jatuporn's criticism when Abhisit was prime minister was honestly made.

The plaintiff said on May 10, 2009 that Jatuporn, a leader of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), defamed him in front of 10,000 people through loud speakers at Wat Phai Kiew Temple in Don Muang in Bangkok by calling him a "tyrant" whose "hands are tainted with blood" who deserved to be sentenced to death for killing people.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Appeal-Court-rejects-Abhisits-defamation-suit-agai-30250779.html

During their Bangkok Shutdown protests, the whistle-blowing, clapper-clad yellow horde defamed the opposition constantly. But that was OK I guess.

Fear not, it's just another step forward on the road to where we all know it's going...

The only variable is whose head will be the first to go on a spike.

I've laid in the popcorn, it should be a good show. Taking bets on who will be the first to run. My money's on a certain rotund little guy with a speech impediment... I'll bet he can motor with the right motivation...

In the meantime, keep 'em coming, the more fuel that's in the balloon, the louder the bang when it pops. No doubt, all is going according to plan.

Winnie

Edited June 10, 201610 yr by Winniedapu

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

In the context of how Jatuporn said what he did, i think the sentence is completely appropriate. He was using his speeches to incite violence and disorder. The lies he told were intended to whip up anger and hatred on a large scale, leading to bloodshed. Regardless of what side of the divide a person is on, they should be punished properly for that, not just a slap on the wrists.

But in that case he should have been charged with promoting insurrection or similar charges (I assume there is an equivalent law on the books), not defamation. The country was damaged by his actions, not Abhisit.

Yes possibly... but if the charge was wrong, the outcome wasn't, so i think most, bar red shirt or Jatuporn supporters, will take that as good enough.

One casts one's mind back to Mark and the DPM at the time, being charged with this same offence by the PTP government tosser DSI Tarit , how the tables have turned , if anything Mark was far too kind and patient in the handling of the whole affair ,he let the crowd build up to an uncontrollable amount of people, who then burnt down a city block, so everyone that was their should have been at least charged with arson or an accessory to commit a crime and to be honest if PTP had curtailed Suthep's little effort, before that 2 got out of hand , Thailand may have been a different place than what it is today .............................

It's not looking good for Yingluck. Will she be next?

The short answer NO

I love the smell of reconciliation in the morning. It smells like "VICTORY".

Appeal Court rejects Abhisit's defamation suit against Jatuporn

December 27, 2014 1:00 am

The Appeal Court yesterday rejected a libel suit filed by former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva against red-shirt co-leader Jatuporn Promphan, saying Jatuporn's criticism when Abhisit was prime minister was honestly made.

The plaintiff said on May 10, 2009 that Jatuporn, a leader of the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), defamed him in front of 10,000 people through loud speakers at Wat Phai Kiew Temple in Don Muang in Bangkok by calling him a "tyrant" whose "hands are tainted with blood" who deserved to be sentenced to death for killing people.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/politics/Appeal-Court-rejects-Abhisits-defamation-suit-agai-30250779.html

During their Bangkok Shutdown protests, the whistle-blowing, clapper-clad yellow horde defamed the opposition constantly. But that was OK I guess.

It's just another step forward on the road to where we all know it's going...

Winnie

Where winnie is that road leading us , pray tell

It's not looking good for Yingluck. Will she be next?

The short answer NO

Hmmm. That assumes the powers-that-be have at least a little common sense, which I too believed at one point, but which I no longer believe.

As much as I sympathise with YL, seeing her banged up would be a useful amount of fuel on what at the moment is a modest smoulder...

Winnie

Edited June 10, 201610 yr by Winniedapu

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

In the context of how Jatuporn said what he did, i think the sentence is completely appropriate. He was using his speeches to incite violence and disorder. The lies he told were intended to whip up anger and hatred on a large scale, leading to bloodshed. Regardless of what side of the divide a person is on, they should be punished properly for that, not just a slap on the wrists.

If you regard even two minutes, let alone two years, behind bars in a Thai jail as a slap on the wrist then you clearly know nothing about the Thai penal system.

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

I have to disagree with you.

He has been out of jail on bail for many years now for various offences .

He was found guilty of this offence in the criminal courts, convicted, appealed, let out on bail and the case went to the court of Appeal who upheld the original conviction.

Part of his problem is that he says and acts before he thinks which is why he was always in trouble.

A new proof that Thailand is the contrary of a democratic country and is 555 years back in time compared to Europe.

Edited June 10, 201610 yr by AloisAmrein

If you regard even two minutes, let alone two years, behind bars in a Thai jail as a slap on the wrist then you clearly know nothing about the Thai penal system.

Firstly, I didn't say that two years was a slap on wrists.

Secondly, if you seriously think that he is going to be in with the riff raff with no extra privileges or special conditions, then it is you who knows nothing about the Thai penal system.

Excellent, even though it's only 2 years. This vile, inbred mutant is finally put away.

I agree that he is a despicable individual, but not on the sentence. I can't help but feel that defamation should be subject to civil remedies alone as it is in many developed countries. Suing for defamation, when often the comments are actually true (not this case), knowing that the person will be subject to criminal penalties, is just wrong.

If the law were changed in such a way such that you could not be sued for stating provable facts about someone, but could only be sued for falsehoods, then perhaps criminal action could be allowed. However, that is not the case in Thailand, telling the truth is not a defence here. As long as the comments can be seen to damage the reputation of someone, then the person who made those comments is in the wrong.

The current defamation laws of Thailand are just used to gag dissent and as a political tool.

They have been that way for many years.

Thaksin was a great one for using those laws. He would sue anybody for billions of baht.

The law OUGHT to be changed but which party would be willing to take the chance and actually do it.

IMO none of the current mob of political parties would want to do it as it too useful for them.

As much as I despise the toad, I do believe that if this had been a person from the other side of the political divide, the sentence would have been suspended.

I cannot help but feel that there is a lack of impartiality at the moment.

In the context of how Jatuporn said what he did, i think the sentence is completely appropriate. He was using his speeches to incite violence and disorder. The lies he told were intended to whip up anger and hatred on a large scale, leading to bloodshed. Regardless of what side of the divide a person is on, they should be punished properly for that, not just a slap on the wrists.

If you regard even two minutes, let alone two years, behind bars in a Thai jail as a slap on the wrist then you clearly know nothing about the Thai penal system.

Having lots of money, even in a Thai jail certainly works to a double standard.