Thai lawyer drops defamation suit against BBC reporter

[webfact]

Thai lawyer drops defamation suit against BBC reporter

 

PHUKET, Thailand - A Thai lawyer has dropped his criminal defamation suit against a BBC correspondent following his investigation into foreigners being scammed of their retirement homes in the country, the broadcaster said Thursday.

 

Jonathan Head, the BBC's Southeast Asia correspondent, faced up to five years in jail after his report exposed how two foreign retirees had Phuket properties stolen from them by a network of criminals and corrupt officials.

 

Rights groups said the case highlighted how Thailand's broad defamation and computer crime laws scupper investigative journalism and make it difficult to uncover wrongdoing in an endemically corrupt country.

 

The lawyer who brought the suit -- Pratuan Thanarak -- decided to drop the charges against Head on the first day of the trial on Wednesday.

 

"The plaintiff has withdrawn his case against BBC journalist Jonathan Head, but as the trial of his co-defendant is continuing, we cannot comment further at present," the BBC said in a short statement.

 

Foreigners cannot own land in Thailand but they often get around it by putting assets in the name of Thais, or by setting up majority Thai-owned shell companies.

 

The 2015 BBC report detailed how a network of Phuket criminals, aided by corrupt officials, stole properties from foreigners by forging land title transfers.

 

One of the victims who featured in the report, British national Ian Rance, is a joint defendant in the prosecution. He still faces a single defamation charge and up to two years in jail if convicted.

 

Rance said he lost $1.2 million worth of properties after his then wife and a gang of money-lenders forged property paperwork.

 

According to the report, Pratuan admitted on tape to certifying Rance's signature without him being present, a move which helped the wife transfer his properties out of his name.

 

She was later convicted and jailed for the scam, but Rance has been hit by a slew of legal cases since going public, a common outcome faced by whistleblowers in Thailand which markets itself as an ideal retirement destination for wealthy foreigners.

 

The criminal complaint filed by Pratuan, which AFP has seen, alleges Rance "defamed" him by talking to the BBC sometime in September 2015 but there are no details of what was said or how it was defamatory.

 

AFP understands the BBC will continue to fund Rance's defamation defence.

 

Pratuan and Rance both declined to comment when contacted by AFP on Thursday, citing ongoing proceedings.

 

Unlike most countries where defamation is a civil crime, in Thailand it is a criminal offence.

 

Private citizens can also launch their own prosecutions and they are not forced to pay costs if they lose.

Similar cases have been brought in recent years.

 

Local news site Phuketwan closed down in 2015 after running out of money in its successful bid to defeat a suit brought by Thailand's navy.

 

Andrew Drummond, a British crime reporter, left the country the same year because of multiple cases brought by those he exposed, as did British labour rights activist Andy Hall in 2016.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30324755

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-08-24

[champers]

Some good news, but now the BBC are out of the dock I hope they give the fullest possible coverage to Ian Rance. It is heartening that the BBC is funding his defence.

[soihok]

14 minutes ago, champers said:

Some good news, but now the BBC are out of the dock I hope they give the fullest possible coverage to Ian Rance. It is heartening that the BBC is funding his defence.

Yes.

Lets hope so.

[darksidedog]

I suspect he has only dropped it because of the level of publicity it is getting, though I hope the BBC will continue to publicize it widely. If he wasn't a complete scumbag he would have dropped the second case against Ian Rance too. I hope Mr. Rance wins his case and then turns around and sues him in return. If ever there was someone deserving of a royal shagging in the courts, it is this horrible toerag.

[impulse]

The social media world is so happy the reporter isn't going to jail that they've forgotten all about the $$$ millions stolen...

 

And, there's still a cloud hanging over the victim/defendant in which his best case outcome may be staying out of jail.  Still losing everything.

 

Not so sure the lawyer's an idiot.  I can think of a lot of other pejoratives, though.

 

[4MyEgo]

Naturally he didn't want to lose more face !

[HooHaa]

well pleased for Mr Head.

 

but it is a partial victory if a victory at all.

[Briggsy]

Many posters are missing the point that the lawyer here is just a relatively small player in a very large fraudulent wealth transfer scheme involving Police and Land Registry officials. The BBC has already exposed the lawyer, a little more investigating and the names of involved officials would be splattered all over the press. Thais are obsessive about reputation and will go to great lengths to keep their name out of the media  in relation to wrongdoing.

 

I suspect the lawyer here, Pratuan Thanarak is closely co-ordinating with other members of the criminal network, if not directly following orders. They may feel they have achieved their immediate goal, to stop any more names being mentioned in relation to this fraud.

 

As ever in Thailand, the big players remain in the shadows.

[metisdead]

Posts and replies containing comments in violation of the following have been removed:

 

11) You will not post slurs, degrading or overly negative comments directed towards Thailand, specific locations, Thai institutions such as the judicial or law enforcement system, Thai culture, Thai people or any other group on the basis of race, nationality, religion, gender or sexual orientation.
 

 

[hathairat2711]

Jonathan Head‏ @pakhead  8m8 minutes ago

More

Charges against my codefendant Ian Rance now also withdrawn. Relief for me but Ian's fight 4 justice & restoration of stolen assets goes on

[Nip]

2 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I suspect he has only dropped it because of the level of publicity it is getting, though I hope the BBC will continue to publicize it widely. If he wasn't a complete scumbag he would have dropped the second case against Ian Rance too. I hope Mr. Rance wins his case and then turns around and sues him in return. If ever there was someone deserving of a royal shagging in the courts, it is this horrible toerag.

Rance as far as I know sued the lawyer already and this filing is the lawyers tit for tat response.

[tso310]

29 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Many posters are missing the point that the lawyer here is just a relatively small player in a very large fraudulent wealth transfer scheme involving Police and Land Registry officials. The BBC has already exposed the lawyer, a little more investigating and the names of involved officials would be splattered all over the press. Thais are obsessive about reputation and will go to great lengths to keep their name out of the media  in relation to wrongdoing.

 

As ever in Thailand, the big players remain in the shadows.

Absolutely correct. It should be noted that the BBC has kept a low profile these last few days, mindful of the legal situation. I suspect a fair amount of political pressure has been put on the Thai government from numerous sources. 

[twix38]

Now let's see justice. Not just relief at dropping defamation charges.

 

Come on! Ensure the lawyer goes to court and this case is not derailed or sidetracked by threats and legal opportunism.

Edited August 24, 2017 by twix38

[helloagain]

3 hours ago, darksidedog said:

I suspect he has only dropped it because of the level of publicity it is getting, though I hope the BBC will continue to publicize it widely. If he wasn't a complete scumbag he would have dropped the second case against Ian Rance too. I hope Mr. Rance wins his case and then turns around and sues him in return. If ever there was someone deserving of a royal shagging in the courts, it is this horrible toerag.

Yes yes yes

[midas]

1 hour ago, Briggsy said:

Many posters are missing the point that the lawyer here is just a relatively small player in a very large fraudulent wealth transfer scheme involving Police and Land Registry officials. The BBC has already exposed the lawyer, a little more investigating and the names of involved officials would be splattered all over the press. Thais are obsessive about reputation and will go to great lengths to keep their name out of the media  in relation to wrongdoing.

 

I suspect the lawyer here, Pratuan Thanarak is closely co-ordinating with other members of the criminal network, if not directly following orders. They may feel they have achieved their immediate goal, to stop any more names being mentioned in relation to this fraud.

 

As ever in Thailand, the big players remain in the shadows.

Well I must be missing something because the part I don't understand is if Ian's wife has already been incarcerated then surely that is prima facie evidence that a crime was committed (i.e. the land transfer to someone else)-otherwise why was she in jail in the first place.?  So why hasn't Ian received his " stolen goods " back virtually immediately? 

It's land just lying there. It's not like money that people can run off with.

[Nip]

Your observation is absolutely correct. Under I think it is Section 46 of the Criminal Code this should take place but this is Thailand and more often than not it doesn't because justice particularly in Phuket is like any other commodity it's bought and sold. 

[jobwolf]

3 hours ago, impulse said:

The social media world is so happy the reporter isn't going to jail that they've forgotten all about the $$$ millions stolen...

 

And, there's still a cloud hanging over the victim/defendant in which his best case outcome may be staying out of jail.  Still losing everything.

 

Not so sure the lawyer's an idiot.  I can think of a lot of other pejoratives, though.

 

Mr. Rance's wife is in jail, so we don't know what happened to the money, or if he still has to sue somebody to maybe get it back. She is guilty so must be the others who helped.

[mike324]

2 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Many posters are missing the point that the lawyer here is just a relatively small player in a very large fraudulent wealth transfer scheme involving Police and Land Registry officials. The BBC has already exposed the lawyer, a little more investigating and the names of involved officials would be splattered all over the press. Thais are obsessive about reputation and will go to great lengths to keep their name out of the media  in relation to wrongdoing.

 

I suspect the lawyer here, Pratuan Thanarak is closely co-ordinating with other members of the criminal network, if not directly following orders. They may feel they have achieved their immediate goal, to stop any more names being mentioned in relation to this fraud.

 

As ever in Thailand, the big players remain in the shadows.

I doubt the lawyer worked with criminal networks. He is just watching his own butt now that his name is all over the news, as well as fear of being targeted by the criminals if he  starts to point fingers and police follow the money trail.

 

 

[Juan B Tong]

What/who is AFP?    

 

Who writes and edits this?   Wouldn't pass English composition 101 for sure!

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

Naturally he didn't want to lose more face !

Or have his face printed/posted. He threatened to sue anyone publishing his picture when he was entering court. 

[Kaoboi Bebobp]

44 minutes ago, Juan B Tong said:

What/who is AFP?    

 

Who writes and edits this?   Wouldn't pass English composition 101 for sure!

 

It's the English service of Agence France-Presse, which provides very thorough coverage of Southeast Asia.  Other news outlets outside SEA are using the AFP story, including The Guardian and BBC. 

Edited August 24, 2017 by Kaoboi Bebobp
Fix

[smotherb]

Doesn't there, somewhere in the halls of logic and forethought, reside some fault at the hands of any foreigner who would attempt to be a landed property owner in a place where he cannot legally own landed property?

[TKDfella]

3 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Many posters are missing the point that the lawyer here is just a relatively small player in a very large fraudulent wealth transfer scheme involving Police and Land Registry officials. The BBC has already exposed the lawyer, a little more investigating and the names of involved officials would be splattered all over the press. Thais are obsessive about reputation and will go to great lengths to keep their name out of the media  in relation to wrongdoing.

 

I suspect the lawyer here, Pratuan Thanarak is closely co-ordinating with other members of the criminal network, if not directly following orders. They may feel they have achieved their immediate goal, to stop any more names being mentioned in relation to this fraud.

 

As ever in Thailand, the big players remain in the shadows.

And the other point could be an extension of what you wrote. It might be that JH, and possibly others, were getting too close. So get a rather 'small fish' to call a suit which then stops the investigative reporting, if I may call it that, on the spot. Drop the charge at some convenient point while others cover their tracks. It's an old trick going back to the ancient Romans.

[Briggsy]

1 hour ago, midas said:

Well I must be missing something because the part I don't understand is if Ian's wife has already been incarcerated then surely that is prima facie evidence that a crime was committed (i.e. the land transfer to someone else)-otherwise why was she in jail in the first place.?  So why hasn't Ian received his " stolen goods " back virtually immediately? 

It's land just lying there. It's not like money that people can run off with.

First part. It is very common for the little people, the lowest of the low, to be jailed. All blame can be placed on them and the case conveniently closed.

 

Second part. The wife was claimed to have received money for the land from loan sharks. She effectively sold it. Again conveniently the assets are lost.

[Briggsy]

1 hour ago, mike324 said:

I doubt the lawyer worked with criminal networks. He is just watching his own butt now that his name is all over the news, as well as fear of being targeted by the criminals if he  starts to point fingers and police follow the money trail.

 

 

I beg to differ. If you think the loan sharks and the Land Registry were not in up to their necks, then I find your viewpoint extremely unlikely.

[realenglish1]

And you still think its a good idea to own condos in Thailand ? 

[realenglish1]

There needs to be reform to make it civil not criminal in these cases This is one of the reasons there is so much corruption No one wants to whistleblow because of fear of going to jail 

 

If you want to really clean it up then allow civil prosecution for this not criminal prosecution  Sadly nothing will change as the powers to be don't really want change just window dressing

[farcanell]

IMHO..... JH should now file against the lawyer for defamation and damages, (for pain and suffering) and financial restitution.

[Briggsy]

2 minutes ago, realenglish1 said:

And you still think its a good idea to own condos in Thailand ? 

Probably better to own a condo than to place multiple properties in the name of your peasant (read : easily intimidated by corrupt police) wife, totalling millions of Euros in one of Thailand's most corrupt and lawless provinces.

 

I take your point though.

 

We are getting off topic.

[terryofcrete]

“As the trial of his co-defendant is continuing we cannot comment any further “ said the BBC , so no publicity fir the time being.