Gadfly Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Not only that, but he was convicted because of (sorry - can't allude to people here - Mod 3) in the author's self-published fictional book". Good think that common sense prevailed, if that's what it was, as he should have never been charged in the first place. Agree 1000% with that, and I often disagree with MM. In terms of both principles and basic tactical issues, this whole sorry episode has been an absolute fiasco for Thailand. Given what's happened since then (for exampel, say, Giles) impossible now to dispute that with a straight face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shygye Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 It was exceedingly clear which (sorry - can't allude to people here - Mod 3) made it quite clear whom he meant. The "unnamed" argument is ridiculous. He should have known what would happen. Again the question - why did he do it? No. The question is why was he prosecuted. You have murders, pedos, rapists, etc getting bail but not him. Why isn't lese majeste applied to counterfeit Thai notes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 No. The question is why was he prosecuted. Probably because he bragged in the Phuket Gazette about teaching ilegally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gadfly Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 So, he was prosecuted, sentenced to three years, spent time in a Thai prison and got the World's media to focuse on Thailand's "misused" (PM's words - check CNN)Les Majeste laws because... he bragged in the Phuket Gazette about teaching ilegally Total non sequiter. The BBC, CNN, Bangkok Post, New York Times, The Nation, and every other news outlet that covered the story reported that this guy was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to three years based on an anachronistic Les Majeste law for a fictional (and, from what I read, fantastical and poorly written) fictional work, but this is really all happened because â??he bragged in the Phuket Gazette about teaching illegally.â? I never heard about this and even it if it is true (who cares) it is entirely irrelevant to this fiasco for Thailand. Smoke and mirrors arenâ??t going to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 Typical superficial journalism. They should have delved deeper. His biggest mistake was insulting (sorry - can't allude to people here - Mod 3) of Songkla University. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 He obviously pissed somebody off. They were looking for an excuse to punish him. His book was it. As an idea of what can happen, I knew an American lecturer at a top Thai govmt university who was absolutely full of himself. He refused to teach the curriculum as he was supposed to, saying he knew better. He bragged about belonging to MENSA, being a National Guard officer etc. Near the end of the term, he got angry about something and decided to leave Thailand. He didn't bother to resign, just intended to disappear at the end of the semester. When he failed to turn in the grades for his classes, the dept head phoned him and demanded that he turn them in before he left. Otherwise, he would be met at the airport by the police and incarcarated. (The dept head's husband was a genuine poobah in LOS.) He wisely came in and handed over the grades for his six clsses, since she did mean business. May be something similar with Nick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted February 21, 2009 Report Share Posted February 21, 2009 He obviously pissed somebody off. They were looking for an excuse to punish him. His book was it. Precisely. He wrote a lot of gonzo stuff for the Phuket Gazette. Here's a sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozpharlap Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 I don't think, on a global scale anyone gives a rat's ass about this bloke. He has been on all news channels here (Australia) and has come across as a bit of a knob. He seems to be a hysterical fellow, speaking loudly (almost yelling) and started praising his Thai wife excessively (whilst she seemed very collected, even she looked a bit shocked to his near breakdown at the airport). He has already stated, emphatically, that he will write another book on his imprisonment - hope it sells more than the first book. Personally, I have no problem with the law - one must remember, that Thai's do love their King and the monarchy. I also consider, anyone who burns a country's flag, should be jailed. If this bloke, would have just played it cool, he would have got out much earlier (with consular support) but as soon as they went public, and crying outrage over the sentence, the Thai spin doctors needed time too manage the mess - he actually did not spend to much time in jail after sentencing. Whilst people say, this law is only akin to Thailand, one might be surprised. Most western countries treat such public defamatory remarks, by way of civil damages however, if one ever takes a look at their own legislation, there is usually a provision for criminal defamation. Section 529 (3) Crimes Act - A person who, without lawful excuse, publishes matter defamatory of another living person (the "victim"): (a) knowing the matter to be false, and ( with intent to cause serious harm to the victim or any other person or being reckless as to whether such harm is caused is guilty of an offence. In Australia, criminal defamation is punishable up to 3 years in jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gadfly Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 I don't think, on a global scale anyone gives a rat's ass about this bloke. That may have been true. Everything else that has been written about everything else Harry is alleged to have done may also be true. I don't know, and I suspect no one else here really knows either. Or whether this had a role in his arrest And at the end of the day it is irrelevant. Smoke and mirrors. The world is paying a great deal more attention now to this law and how it is employed. Harry may or may not have acted with the most base motives, but his arrest and the picture of him in chains has galvanized interest in this law and how it is employed. Before Harry's case, it was an oddity, barely warranting a mention in the international press (the drunken Swiss guy is a good example of what an oddity it was.) Now, its clearly on the radar. It adds a graphic and very unflattering picture of Thailand when stories run about the BBC reporter, Giles or other academics who are facing LM charges. Behind the specific stories is the practice and the principle. In practice, this law has been used to stifle political dissent. Bumbling Harry got the attention of the world's press, but when they look past his case to past cases about how the law has been employed, an ugly picture emerges. In principle, there is, IMHO, a serious problem here. The law permits and is being used to imprison people for expressing their views. Because of where Thailand stands now, this is a time when discussion and preparations will need to be made - But none of that can be dicussed. My guess: if it wasn't Harry, it would have been someone else. The problem runs much deeper. He appears to be a flawed character, but that really doesn't matter. Pandora's box has now been opened, and there is no shutting the lid now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted February 22, 2009 Report Share Posted February 22, 2009 Don't get me wrong, I understand why many are against this law, and especially against how it is misused. As I stated, many Thais are against it as well, and given that most of these guys are let go way short of their sentence also tells me Thais don't take it seriously. But the bigger issue is who are we to go and intentionally break this law just because we feel it is stupid? On a slightly different note, in the last few years, the LM charge has been made against several Thai people involved in all this Thaksin/anti Thaksin business, how have they fared? and why didn't anyone stand up for them? Seems only when some dip shit farang does it, do we care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.