webfact

Discovery Channel adventurer calls for justice for his Thai wife

225 posts in this topic

22 minutes ago, JAG said:

I agree with you "Wilsonandson". 100%

 

There are of course others suffering such blatant miscarriages of justice, which does not of course reduce the argument for quashing her conviction. I'm not getting into the arguments as to whether the drugs were for private use, because frankly as far as I can see the "evidence" used to convict her stinks to high heaven, and the way in which the trial was conducted shouts fit up so so loudly.

 

I do find here one of those troubling inconsistencies about this country. Many of those involved in sending her to jail may well  be seemingly devout Buddhists, wearing amulets, making merit, donating to temples, cultivating connections with senior clergy and so on. I am at a loss to understand why the Buddhist clerical hierarchy do not make some sort of  stand on this. Their western Christian counterparts, were it to have happened in a European country, would be all over it like a rash, (and rightly so). Pointing out that this, and other cruel miscarriages are the very antithesis of The Buddhas teachings (I am sticking my neck out here in presuming this) and of the spirit of Buddhism may temper the enthusiasm to use the law to crush people who have got in the way.

 

Perhaps any adherents of the Buddhist faith may care to comment or explain? I'm not having a pop, as I said I find it a troubling inconsistency.

A puzzling reply. So this is about religion? Yuyee is Christian? I thought it was about not paying 400,000 baht to the alledged policeman for setting free a cheetah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 204   Posted (edited)

40 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

A puzzling reply. So this is about religion? Yuyee is Christian? I thought it was about not paying 400,000 baht to the alledged policeman for setting free a cheetah.

No. The case itself is certainly not about religion. But quite simply, if as I suspect many of those responsible for fitting her up are Buddhists, how can they square what they have done with the teachings they claim to follow? The rest of my comment, asking why the Buddhist establishment remains silent follows from that.

That's what I mean by (for me) a troubling inconsistency. It is a side issue.

Edited by JAG
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, JAG said:

No. The case itself is certainly not about religion. But quite simply, if as I suspect many of those responsible for fitting her up are Buddhists, how can they square what they have done with the teachings they claim to follow? The rest of my comment, asking why the Buddhist establishment remains silent follows from that.

That's what I mean by (for me) a troubling inconsistency. It is a side issue.

Buddhism is also silent on many social issues: poverty, homelessness, corruption, prison reform etc. One thing that sets Western religions apart is their tendency to push for social reform.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/03/2017 at 7:50 PM, Chip Allen said:

Buddhism is also silent on many social issues: poverty, homelessness, corruption, prison reform etc. One thing that sets Western religions apart is their tendency to push for social reform.

All religions are based on 2 things. Fear and blind faith. Fear: break the rules of our religion and you will be punished. Blind faith: believe in a supernatural being that cannot be seen and cannot he heard and that`s about all a fellow congregation can do for you.

 

Even during WW2, the Pope refused to condemn the Holocaust and the Nazi regime when millions were being slaughtered on all sides and today the religious hierarchy are completely out of touch that makes them useless in every aspect and why I have no interest in the facades they describe as religion and a worshipping of a God that couldn`t care less.

 

Back on the subject of drugs, one way or another drugs are a destroyer of lives and sadly, the world is losing it`s war on drugs. They are the scourge of civilisation and those that fall foul of drugs have only themselves to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 208   Posted (edited)

53 minutes ago, rwdrwdrwd said:

Scourge of civilisation.. you're having a laugh.

The 'war on drugs' is a very modern concept and is not motivated by altruism. It's origins in the US are protectionist, from both a commercial (alcohol industry) and racial (chinese, mexicans and 'blacks') background.

Given different drugs are legal in different jurisdictions, cocaine being legal in some countries and alcohol being illegal in others for example, the blanket statement that 'drugs' are the 'scourge of civilisation' is illogical given even the tiniest scrutiny.

It`s obvious that posters who consider the OP woman has suffered a great injustice and think that the bans on drugs are illogical are those who believe all drugs should be legalised, and guess that they are the people that dabble in drugs themselves one way or another.

 

But I don`t, I believe that drugs are the scourge of civilisation and also this is not a modern phenomenon, the war on drugs has been going on for decades. Comparing alcohol, tobacco and other legal harmful substances as an excuse to legalise drugs does not make dealing in drugs acceptable, because any addictions can cause misery and if drugs did become legal then the skies the limit, it won`t simply stop there, a line has to be drawn somewhere.

 

This is a three phase problem of opinions, do some believe that this woman should have been let off with a caution? Or should she had gone to jail but served a much softer sentence? Or did she deserve all that was throw at her?

 

Now I wonder if anyone can give me a good argument without getting personal?

Edited by cyberfarang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 210   Posted (edited)

The system of jurisprudence should be reformed so that it can not lead to self-imposed or purchased judgments.

A court consisting of one professional judge and two appointees (Laity judges) has proved itself for light criminal offenses in many countries.

Every citizen can be called for this function for a certain time. The only prerequisite is, that the Laity judges do not have any criminal records.

In the process of finding the right judgment, the professional judge (has a university degree in law) explains the possible penalty frame and makes his penalty proposal. The lay judges can influence the amount of the sentence within the legal framework. The judgment between the three persons (one professional judge and two appointees) must be unanimous. Subsequently, a judgment is issued: In the name of the people (folk).

15 years for 0,25g ( 251mg) cocaine!
That is the weight of dirt under one fingernail.
Is from my point of view an inhuman misjudgment.

Edited by tomacht8
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, rwdrwdrwd said:


Given we're in the year 2017, a set of laws drawn up within the last century, and primarily within the last 50, is certainly a modern phenomenon.

I'm not referencing alcohol in order to to present an 'excuse for legalising drugs', I reference it because your argument infers that there is a definitive list of drugs that are illegal and that are not - which is entirely down to jurisdiction. Given this, if 'illegal drugs' are the 'scourge of civilisation', does this mean that the scourge modifies itself based upon the location?

Is alcohol a scourge in Saudi where it is illegal but not in Thailand where it is legal?

Is cocaine a scourge in Thailand where it is illegal but not in Peru where it is legal?

You're perfectly entitled to your opinion that 'drugs' are the 'scourge of civilisation', but such a sweeping statement isn't logical, given that the inclusion of any given substance in the category 'illegal drugs' is dependent upon locale yet a drug remains the same substance wherever it is in the world.

 

Calling someone out for making an illogical statement isn't 'getting personal'.

You make some very good points. Going on the lines of your comments; having sex with a minor can be determined by what is considered as being of the age of consent depending on which country we are in and in America penalties for criminal offences vary from State to State. Prostitution can be legal in some countries and illegal in others. So who can say what is wrong and what is right under the laws and these days how can we determine what are the facts and what is being fabricated against people when all we get are conflicting reports.

 

Regardless of the laws I still believe that anything to do with drugs other than for medicinal or medical purposes is a very bad thing. I worked voluntary as a Samaritan for 3 years and have witnessed first hand what drugs can do to people and why I am so anti drug.

 

My personal view on the OP after studying the case in more detail since this thread was opened,  is that I think she should have been punished for bringing an illegal drug into the country, but 5 years would have been more appropriate as what she is serving now is way too harsh. I found the prison photos of her upsetting and yes, believe it or not I`m not stone cold and do have a heart.  I suppose it`s like eating chicken or pork, we tuck away at the meal then feel horrible about it when we see videos and scenes of the animals suffering and killed in the slaughterhouses.

 

So with me I am still at odds with myself over this. On one hand I know the suffering drugs can cause and on the other hand I am unsure if real justice can be served in a country like Thailand where sentencing depends on who you are or what you are.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about driving a screwdriver into an innocent kids brain?  Is that justifiable for 15 years in prison?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, survivalblue said:

How about driving a screwdriver into an innocent kids brain?  Is that justifiable for 15 years in prison?

For that I believe a sentience nothing less then a death penalty should be appropriate. But you must have heard of the old saying; the laws an ass. The problem is that punishments dished out by the State are still subject to human judgements whereas it`s based on the opinions of those given the powers to pass judgements on behalf of the State, which means every legal system is bound to be flawed and still boils down to opinions the same as our debate on TV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, survivalblue said:

How about driving a screwdriver into an innocent kids brain?  Is that justifiable for 15 years in prison?

15 years would be right there.
But under the influence of drugs one is insane.
This affects the penalty.
Penalty reduction under the influence of drugs.
non compos mentis.
Interesting as the influence of drugs in legal proceedings, then has a criminal reducing effect.
   

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 215   Posted (edited)

I'm not saying the woman shouldn't serve her time or be punished for a sniffle of coke she had with her.

But in reality, there are African thugs on Sukhumvit openly selling drugs.

Hiso kids are doing drugs everyday.

There are hiso kids driving screwdrivers into innocent kids brains.

There are hiso kids killing innocent people on the roads.

Among the many absurd incidents that can be listed it seems that Franky Discovery might be right about freeing his wife. 

She should just be banned from Thailand rather than sit in prison.

 

I'm just a noso.  I don't have a say in anything.

 

 

Edited by survivalblue
name edit
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, survivalblue said:

I'm not saying the woman shouldn't serve her time or be punished for a sniffle of coke she had with her.

But in reality, there are African thugs on Sukhumvit openly selling drugs.

Hiso kids are doing drugs everyday.

There are hiso kids driving screwdrivers into innocent kids brains.

There are hiso kids killing innocent people on the roads.

Among the many absurd incidents that can be listed it seems that Franky Discovery might be right about freeing his wife. 

She should just be banned from Thailand rather than sit in prison.

 

I'm just a noso.  I don't have a say in anything.

 

 

They cannot ban her from Thailand because she is a Thai citizen, but otherwise I agree with almost everything you say. The system is surely unfair and I am leaning towards the Spanish husband maybe right in complaining that his wife has been given a raw deal, although I don`t believe he is as ignorant of the fact his wife was into drugs as we maybe led to believe and still think that people dealing in drugs should serve time. This is why right from the outset I said; do not break any laws in Thailand whether feeling they are wrong or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

You continue to ignore the 'influential person' and ignore any possibility they were planted. She asked for a drugs test, the amount was increased from 5mg to 251mg.  You ignore, continuously, that she was chased for 400,000.

 

You continuously come across as a 12th century puritanical fanatic who thinks the Inquisition was a 'good thing' and poor Yuyee deserves her 15 years, in fact did you not say it was not enough?  Horrible and uncaring without a gram of compassion.

I'm not taking sides but if you read cyberfarang's post #211 he says that he thought  5 years would have been more approprate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spaniel said:

I'm not taking sides but if you read cyberfarang's post #211 he says that he thought  5 years would have been more approprate.

post #123   "let her rot in jail"

 

Why 5 years for 5mg?  was the amount shown in Court?  NO  was the infamous MM packet?  NO  you REALLY believe this mother of 4 brought this into the country?  and her refusal to pay 400,000 is irrelevant?  her animal rights work? 

 

EVEN if she had it's hardly trafficking is it??? 

 

main-qimg-2dfb0002bb0986167ae65bfcb5c0499b-c.jpg

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2017 at 7:30 PM, JAG said:

No. The case itself is certainly not about religion. But quite simply, if as I suspect many of those responsible for fitting her up are Buddhists, how can they square what they have done with the teachings they claim to follow? The rest of my comment, asking why the Buddhist establishment remains silent follows from that.

That's what I mean by (for me) a troubling inconsistency. It is a side issue.

Good questions....no clear answers.

Edited by Chip Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2017 at 6:29 PM, JAG said:

But it's not, a great deal of tolerance has been and is being shown to several characters, who have killed people whilst acting under the influence of drugs, is that not so?

Well, it's "zero tolerance" for ORDINARY PEOPLE. If you're hiso and want to fork over obscene amounts of cash. much can be overlooked, including murder.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

A drugs test is to determine if someone has used drugs, this was about carrying drugs on her person, I think?

 

If you read all my posts you will see that after much debate on this, I am now leaning towards her sentence is too harsh. I needed convincing and now I`m convinced and I do regret my earlier comments, I jumped the gun too quick and was wrong, but now have seen the light so to speak. Regarding the 400000 baht blood money, I have said that in Thailand the rules can be changed depending on what you are or who you are and I found the prison photos heartbreaking, it was like a smack in the face for me. Although I hate drugs and drug dealers I can`t stand to see people dehumanised like that.

 

What else do you want me to say on this matter or what else is there to add?

fair enough and thank you for restoring your integrity - respect

 

For me there are too many doubts and added with the animal activist work and being chased for 400,000 it stinks and the MM packet NOR the 5g or 251g have ever made it to Court. To think of her there for another 13.5 years saddens me and disturbs me daily. We will all  eventually forget and move on but she and her family will not. I can only hope that international groups carry on highlighting it and there may be a Royal Pardon eventually.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, cyberfarang said:

A drugs test is to determine if someone has used drugs, this was about carrying drugs on her person, I think?

 

If you read all my posts you will see that after much debate on this, I am now leaning towards her sentence is too harsh. I needed convincing and now I`m convinced and I do regret my earlier comments, I jumped the gun too quick and was wrong, but now have seen the light so to speak. Regarding the 400000 baht blood money, I have said that in Thailand the rules can be changed depending on what you are or who you are and I found the prison photos heartbreaking, it was like a smack in the face for me. Although I hate drugs and drug dealers I can`t stand to see people dehumanised like that.

 

What else do you want me to say on this matter or what else is there to add?

While it's true that a drugs test is to see whether someone has taken drugs recently and this was about carrying drugs, I think a legitimate question to ask is, if she was intentionally carrying drugs, why would that be? Virtually the only two explanations that make any sense would be that she was involved in trafficking drugs into the country (for sale) or she was a drug user and had them for personal use. Since the amount found (which, according to the original arrest report was only 5 mg, not 250mg and worth about 12 Baht) is totally insufficient to realistically support the idea of drug trafficking, that leaves us with the possibility that they were for personal use. That being the case, a drugs test (although having no bearing on the charges) would been highly revealing in terms of establishing whether she was in fact a current and habitual drug user. And if she wasn't, then that would throw the whole idea of her having carried the drugs with her, into question. 

 

I also don't understand your earlier post dismissing the idea that her two earlier lawyers quit because of intimidation and suggesting that maybe they quit either because they didn't believe her story or thought they might not get paid. The first idea just doesn't hold water.  Defence lawyers don't abandon their clients just because they have doubts about their guilt - if they did, the majority of criminals in the world would end up without lawyers and this simply isn't the case.

 

As for not getting paid, she has a husband who has a TV career and was willing to put up millions of Baht for bail so money would not appear to be an issue.  

 

The first lawyer stated quite openly that he quit because he was scared - what reason or evidence do you have for believing that wasn't true?

 

As far as I can tell, this whole case stinks. The repeated demands for money for the leopard they freed, the way the drugs were found, the discrepancies in the amount, the fact that the drug evidence was not presented in court, a trial that lasted only 3 hours with no defence witnesses, the fact that not one but two defence lawyers quit the case and the third doesn't want to be identified, all point to there being something 'not quite right' about this. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 25 March 2017 14:52
Sponsors
  • Popular Now