Appeals Court denies bail for Amphon

The Appeals Court has rejected Amphon Tangnoppakul’s bail request, saying that it ‘does not believe that the defendant will not flee.’  The public prosecutor has been granted yet another month to appeal Joe Gordon’s case.

According to Amphon’s lawyer Phunsuk Phunsukcharoen, on 22 Feb the Appeals Court refused to grant her client temporary release for the second time after he was given a sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment for lèse majesté late last year.  The bail was sought this time with guarantees from 7 university academics, and cash from the Ministry of Justice’s Rights and Liberty Protection Department, worth two million baht in total.

On 19 Feb, Rosmalin, Amphon’s wife, joined a hunger strike with other activists for 24 hours in front of the Criminal Court, together with Tam Phuchaisang, the mother of Suraphak, a website developer who was arrested in September last year and has been detained since without bail for Facebook posts. Rosmalin said that if her husband’s bail was granted, she would take him to Luang Pho To Temple to give 400 boiled eggs to fulfil her vow. 

The lawyer said that the defence team would submit another bail request to the Supreme Court next week.

In rejecting the bail request, the Appeals Court said that it considered that the charges against the defendant were severe and ‘the defendant’s arguments against the verdict of the Court of First Instance do not have the credibility to believe that the defendant did not commit the crimes.  If [the defendant is] granted temporary release, [the Appeals Court] has no reason to believe that the defendant will not flee.  The illness which the defendant claims [as one of the reasons for the bail] does not appear to be life-threatening.  Given that government medical facilities are already available for the treatment of the defendant, [the Appeals Court] refuses temporary release for the defendant during the appeal.’

In the Joe Gordon case, lawyer Anon Nampha said that the public prosecutor had requested and been granted by the court renewal of a one-month extension to appeal the case until 8 March, the third time since he was sentenced to two years and a half in jail on 8 November last year.

This extension, in effect, means that his case is not finalized.  He has to remain in prison, unable to seek a royal pardon.

According to the lawyer, the public prosecutor can ask the court to extend the period for appeal indefinitely.

According to a close friend of Joe Gordon, Joe felt that he was subject to persecution, being locked in jail for a lengthy period time and not allowed to seek a royal pardon, despite the fact that he had already confessed.

It was reported that the US Embassy had regularly visited Joe and closely followed his case.

Comments

Pitiful and shameless.

Pitiful and shameless.

"Pitiful" True, true... "and

"Pitiful"

True, true...

"and shameless"

Also true, but think about it. How many Thais have you ever known who had any sense of shame at all?

To have a sense of shame you have to have some smarts. Most Thais are thick as pudding. The two things are linked...

Sorry - you sound like a

Sorry - you sound like a racist claiming Thais are "thick as pudding." What if I said Jews were "schemers?" Or Nigerians are coke dealers?

Hateful generalizations have no place in rational debate. What is shameful is a foreigner like you, from a nation with an imperial past, still carrying on the despicable tradition of viewing the world through your own prejudices and delusions of superiority, and then imposing them on others.

Empire was and is a disgrace - so is the thinking that created them.

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2012/02/empires-double-edged-sword-global.html

Sorry - you sound like a

Sorry - you sound like a racist claiming Thais are "thick as pudding." What if I said Jews were "schemers?" Or Nigerians are coke dealers?"

And Yanks hypocrites perhaps? These are common perceptions, perhaps true perhaps untrue. Thais are thick as pudding, this is a demonstrable fact. Mean IQ=88. Thick as pudding.

"Hateful generalizations have no place in rational debate. "

I don't think I'm about to take any lessons from you on rational debate sonny. I suggest you forget the PC crap, forget the emotional responses to things that may be true but which you don't think ought to be true, and generally get a clue.

Now fuck off and sin no more.

Despite of your periodic

Despite of your periodic change of alias, do you think we could possibly mistake you for anyone else? Why do you bother? No matter how many times you slough off your skin, you always remain anonymous.

Have you had a chance to read The Mismeasure of Man (pdf)?

"Despite of your periodic

"Despite of your periodic change of alias, do you think we could possibly mistake you for anyone else? "

Do you think I would really care what you think JFL? Try to bear in mind that you're only an American so you have almost no credibility on anything. Remember your place. Your self-immersion is astonishing. Do you *really* think I change my posting name and IP address just to confuse *you*?

You silly boy. You have no idea whatever why I do what I do and equally, why what *you*, a middle-aged, under-performing refugee from his own country because he couldn;t make it there either, think is of no importance. You are merely a less intelligent version of Tony, whining and crying about things that if you had any balls at all you would try to change instead of just whining and crying in your beer about them.

Dear oh dear. Perhaps it might help if you write 50 times "John Francis Lee is unimportant, and any random and generally half-baked thoughts that might cross his under-performing mind by accident are similarly unimportant. What is important is the way things are, not the way John Francis Lee might think they ought to be".

Give it a try.

Tsk.

Well, Mr Anonymous... you

Well, Mr Anonymous... you must admit that no one will ever mistake you for anyone else.

"Well, Mr Anonymous... you

"Well, Mr Anonymous... you must admit that no one will ever mistake you for anyone else."

John, why must I accept anything of the sort? Why must I accept anything that you say when most of what you say is either misinformed, socially naive or the result of your misunderstanding relatively simple concepts. Its a pity really because some of what you say is reasonable, but it gets lost in the noise of prejudice, bitterness and disillusion that you exude so prolifically.

One of those simple concepts is this: If you don’t make ad-hominem comments against me in public, I won’t feel the need to slap you down in public, and we can discuss things in relative harmony. You’ve made many ad-hominem comments against me, mainly for stating facts that you find inconvenient or offensive or simply refuse to believe without bothering to investigate them. As a consequence of your ad-hominem remarks I have slapped you down a few times. Have you learned from any of this? Apparently not.

Another is this: many people feel the need for social acceptance, and their behaviour is tuned to achieve not independence or maturity of intellectual growth, but acceptance - usually by the soporific and often dim-witted majority. I am not one of these people but most Thais are because they have been indoctrinated to conform in all important respects and not rock the boat. Its a serious flaw in the Thai persona which you seem to think is some kind of ideal to be emulated instead of some kind of basic weakness to be overcome, which is what I think.

So. Do learn how not to cry in your beer because someone kicks your ass John, learn how it is better to act like a grown-up and not make ad-hominem remarks against people than it is to get your ass kicked for doing so. Try to rise above being a less-intelligent-than-Tony Tony. For the sake of your own self-esteem if nothing else.

Like I said, its a basic concept. I’m sure you'll be able to understand it.

‘the defendant’s arguments

‘the defendant’s arguments against the verdict of the Court of First Instance do not have the credibility to believe that the defendant did not commit the crimes.'

Translation:
guilty until proven innocent

The Thai Kourt is in direct defiance of Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights!

But that's the whole point. To demonstrate to the world and its citizens that the Royal Thai Government is no way constrained by law, morality, or human decency when it comes to crushing its political opponents and terrorizing its citizens.

Thus the Royal Thai Government consciously drags HM the King through the mud and the slime it itself inhabits in direct defiance of HM King Bhumipol's explicit request on the occasion of his birthday speech of 2005, as noted by eight members of his extended family in the course of their protest against these continuous lese majeste persecutions.

'According to the lawyer, the public prosecutor can ask the court to extend the period for appeal indefinitely.

'According to a close friend of Joe Gordon, Joe felt that he was subject to persecution, being locked in jail for a lengthy period time and not allowed to seek a royal pardon, despite the fact that he had already confessed.

'It was reported that the US Embassy had regularly visited Joe and closely followed his case.'

Translation:
Catch-22. You cannot appeal because you have plead quilty, seeking a pardon on the advice of United States Government which - as an American citizen - you assumed to be acting in your interests. But now you cannot be pardoned because the theoretic right to appeal, which cannot be pursued, is perversely kept 'open' in the slimiest of double crosses by the two governments woking in tandem.

I suppose that Joe Gordon should feel relieved that Barack Obama did not order him assassinated?

Like the Royal Thai Government the United States Government is sending the message that it is not in anyway constrained by law, morality, or human decency when it comes to crushing its political opponents and terrorizing its citizens.

@john francis lee, I'm afraid

@john francis lee, I'm afraid it's not just the Royal Thai government who perpetuates these problems. But it's the whole entire network monarchy.

Yes... but in this case it is

Yes... but in this case it is the Royal Thai Kourts, a part of the Royal Thai Government, which are the efficient cause of this cynical, lawless oppression, is it not? This is an act of none other than the Royal Thai Government.

Perhaps you are arguing, as so many seem prone to, that this is not the fault of the Puea Thai government? That the Kourts operate separately from the government? That 'nothing can be done' to halt the systemic miscarriage of justice?

There is an Attorney General, isn't there? The AG could have been at the Kourt arguing for justice. That is a legitimate function of the AG, is it not? I didn't notice that the AG was there, or that the Puea Thai even said a word in condemnation of these vicious, petty and illegal acts. The prosecutor's work for the elected government, do they not?

I see you're in TX. Perhaps the habit in the US of the 'progressives' who elected him to ignore Barack Obama's complete responsibility for everything that's gone wrong, for all the evils that have not only not been corrected but have in fact been augmented and intensified under his administration, has rubbed off.

The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Barack Obama is a War Criminal; and the Shinawatra II government cares no more about human and civil rights than did the RTA/PAD/Democrat putsch that immediately preceded it... or than Shinawatra I for that matter.

In the US there is a duopoly which holds the government hostage and which does the bidding of the network plutocracy... so too in Thailand, apparently.

Yes, this is absolutely true.

Yes, this is absolutely true. The symbiosis between the host and the parasites.

I could believe that the big guy was a victim if he didn't mercilessly use the parasites and benefit financially from them when it suits his convenience. Oops, sorry - the convenience of his personal fortune which isn't really his at all but which he looks after on behalf of his beloved Thai people. Whilst living an excellent - non-por-jai existence in the process. I think I want to vomit.

The parasites feed off the big guy and the big guy feeds off the Thai people. There is nothing healthy or beneficial to democracy or indeed basic civilised behavious in this parasitic relationship. Yet the Thai people have been fooled into thinking they ought to love it.

So love it they do. Because they've been told to.

Thick as pudding.

The Thai Kourt is in direct

The Thai Kourt is in direct defiance of Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights!

But that's the whole point. To demonstrate to the world and its citizens that the Royal Thai Government is no way constrained by law, morality, or human decency when it comes to crushing its political opponents and terrorizing its citizens.

Thus the Royal Thai Government consciously drags HM the King through the mud and the slime it itself inhabits in direct defiance of HM King Bhumipol's explicit request on the occasion of his birthday speech of 2005, as noted by eight members of his extended family in the course of their protest against these continuous lese majeste persecutions.

JFL, I think its you who are missing the whole point, perhaps out of delicacy (for which read 'political correctness').

Governments have no influence over the courts in Thailand, [.].

The government does not drag the king through the mud, [.] and those who feel the need to be sycophants of the king do that - of course the government itself is also probably in this odious group as well as the lunatic fringe of hangers-on and ass-kissers.

There is intellectual merit in describing things as thy are, not as it is politically correct to do in the hope that political correctness will induce people to listen because their idiotic beliefs are not being questioned. They won't. People have idiotic beliefs because thy have learned that idiotic beliefs give them warm and comfortable feelings, and feelings are much stronger motivators than thoughts. That's all.

People who have idiotic beliefs - like the Thais have about the monarch, are demonstrably prone to idiocy and self-induced 'comfort' blindness. In this way, they can discover the same warm inner feelings that many other people have when choosing to believe that there's a big guy up there floating around in the sky who watches every move and misses not one scratched ass in their otherwise miserable lives.

For as long as Thais choose to regulate their lives in the same way that people did 400 years ago, when they were about 30 points less intelligent, (yes, even thicker than Thais are today) then there will be people who conclude that they are even more piteously stupid than the god squad.

Again, let's not mention that

Again, let's not mention that all of these cases involve UDD members.

I don't believe rank and file UDD members should be going to jail - rather the leaders and the foreign-funded propagandists supporting them.

If journalists, like Prachatai claims to be, did their job and fully disclosed the connections between Thaksin, the UDD and foreign interests on Wall Street and in London, these people might instead of going to jail over LM and this pointless cause, be spending their time trying to improve education at the grassroots or other pragmatic solutions to fix real, everyday problems.

Last time I checked, taxi drivers needed money, not the freedom to slander their King, to fill their gas tanks. Their kids needed qualified teachers with access to quality resources to provide them with a proper education, not elections and red shirt villages or the "right" to block up city streets for a billionaire crook.

If either side of this pointless political fight truly cared about the people, they would be working on real, permanent solutions, not handouts, to help these people help themselves put roofs over their heads, healthy food in their stomachs, and practical knowledge in their minds.

A self-sufficient, self-reliant, educated, self-employed population dependent on only their skills and ambition will procure and protect for themselves all the rights they are inherently born with. They cannot be handed out or protected by "laws."

PS Postman - even as you make a mockery of Thai people and their centuries of tradition, your beloved socialist utopia that never was, in the West, is already circling the toilet bowl. You are as much a subject to Western neo-imperialism as Thais are to their ancient institution - only you are too arrogant/ignorant to admit it.

And please enlighten us as to who was conducting IQ tests 400 years ago....

Sometimes in life you can't

Sometimes in life you can't believe your ears Tony. Sometimes you can't believe your luck, and some fool leads with his chin like you just did. What a complete bozo you really are.

The change of IQ over time is called the Flynn effect. Look it up. If anything I under-stated the probable reduction of IQ going back in time.

Do you think for one moment - a millisecond even - that I would be like you and put up stuff without foundation here?

You must be a moron if you do.

So you think I'm a socialist too? Well, there ya go. You think I'm a socialist, I think your a dickhead. At least one of us is already right. You might be right too. Maybe.

"In the Joe Gordon case,

"In the Joe Gordon case, lawyer Anon Nampha said that the public prosecutor had requested and been granted by the court renewal of a one-month extension to appeal the case until 8 March, the third time since he was sentenced to two years and a half in jail on 8 November last year.
This extension, in effect, means that his case is not finalized. He has to remain in prison, unable to seek a royal pardon.
According to the lawyer, the public prosecutor can ask the court to extend the period for appeal indefinitely.
According to a close friend of Joe Gordon, Joe felt that he was subject to persecution, being locked in jail for a lengthy period time and not allowed to seek a royal pardon, despite the fact that he had already confessed.
"

If I know how things usually work in Thailand, I'd guess the public prosecutor is a royal appointment, with no government oversight - am I wrong?

I'd guess that the "no

I'd guess that the "no government oversight" is de facto not de jure.