Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Out there...
    StrontiumDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    BKK
    Posts
    40,039

    Court drops internet lese majeste case

    http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingn...-against-woman

    Court drops internet lese majeste case

    The Criminal Court has thrown out a lese majeste case brought against a woman accused of posting internet messages offensive to the monarchy, giving her the benefit of the doubt.

    The court on Monday dismissed the prosecution case against Noppawan Tang-udomsuk, who was accused of insulting the monarchy and violating the Computer Crimes Act.

    The prosecution as the plaintiff claimed that on Oct 15, 2008 Ms Noppawan posted messages deemed offensive to the monarchy on www.prachatai.com for public viewing.

    However, the court said on Monday the IP address and the telephone number used to connect to the internet to post the message, which was cited as evidence against the defendant, belonged to the mother of the defendant.

    Evidence showed that the defendant used the internet after her mother, the court said.

    The court said the plaintiff had no witnesses or evidence to prove that the defendant had actually posted the message.

    The court said the evidence cited by the prosecution was doubtful, and therefore it gave the defendant the benefit of the doubt and dismissed the case.
    "Slavery is the daughter of darkness; an ignorant people is the blind instrument of its own destruction; ambition and intrigue take advantage of the credulity and inexperience of men who have no political, economic or civil knowledge. They mistake pure illusion for reality, license for freedom, treason for patriotism, vengeance for justice."-Simn Bolvar

  2. #2
    Mid
    Mid is offline
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,415
    Lse majest case against Prachatai poster dropped
    Mon, 31/01/2011

    The Criminal Court has dropped the case against a woman alleged to have posted offensive messages on the Prachatai webboard in 2008, citing inconclusive evidence, thus giving her the benefit of the doubt.

    On 31 Jan, the Criminal Court dismissed the case against Miss A, 28, who was alleged to have used the alias Bento to post messages offensive to the Queen and the Crown Prince on the Prachatai webboard in October 2008, in violation of Section 112 of the Criminal Code and Section 14 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act.

    According to the court ruling, the investigators found that the internet service and telephone number were registered under the name of the defendant’s mother, and were used for her family’s business.

    Although the defendant’s notebook computer contained information pertaining to the Prachatai website, no evidence was found to show that the messages had been posted through that computer, the court said.

    The court went on to say that the defendant was arrested in a police raid, so she could not have deleted the information. The prosecutor merely checked the IP address with Prachatai and the internet service provider, and this was not sufficient evidence. There was no witness who could confirm that the defendant posted the messages. The defendant’s residence was a factory which had several computers with internet connections, and it was not known which one was used for the posting. Several employees could have used the computers.

    The court cited the testimony of a defence witness, an IT expert from Australia, who said that any sophisticated computer user could fake an IP address. Therefore, it was possible that the IP address had been faked.

    Unconvinced by the evidence, the court gave the defendant the benefit of the doubt, and dismissed the case.

    Miss A was arrested on 30 Jan 2009, and was detained at the Central Women’s Detention Centre for about 10 days before being granted bail. Her alleged offence was also used against Prachatai Director Chiranuch Premchaiporn as the 10th charge against her under Section 15 of the 2007 Computer Crimes Act. Chiranuch’s trial will begin on 4 Feb.

    Prachatai has withheld the defendant’s real name at her own strong request.

    Source:
    ยกŸ‰[at]‡„”ีหมิˆ™€šื‰[at]‡สู‡ œู‰–ูกกลˆาวหา‚žส •Œƒ™€ว‡šš[at]รŒ”›ระŠา„— | ›ระŠา„— ห™ั‡สื[at]žิมžŒ[at][at]™

    prachatai.com

  3. #3
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:24 AM
    Posts
    43,631
    Seems all the pirating cases in the UK are going the same way, for the same reason. Having an IP address is not considered proof that a particular individual committed the offence.

  4. #4
    Have you got any cheese Thetyim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Mousehole
    Posts
    20,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Mid
    an IT expert from Australia, who said that any sophisticated computer user could fake an IP address
    Can someone explain what he means by that ?
    A proxy I understand, but it would show the IP address of the proxy server.

    How can it show the IP address of a private user?

  5. #5
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 11:24 AM
    Posts
    43,631
    Quote Originally Posted by Thetyim View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Mid
    an IT expert from Australia, who said that any sophisticated computer user could fake an IP address
    Can someone explain what he means by that ?
    A proxy I understand, but it would show the IP address of the proxy server.

    How can it show the IP address of a private user?
    It depends what the bloke meant by "sophisticated" as in capable of IP address spoofing sophisticated or using a proxy sophisticated.

    It's a bit of a generalisation though.

  6. #6
    Thailand Expat
    BobR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    12-09-2017 @ 06:57 AM
    Posts
    7,750
    We used to disparage Thailand (carefully) over their leste Majeste laws being a limit on freedom of speech. But now with the silly hate speech crimes and prosecutions in Britain, the rest of Europe and Australia, Thailand actually has more freedom of speech than many of our home countries.

  7. #7
    Mid
    Mid is offline
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,415
    Thai woman jailed for 5 years for anti-royal post on website
    Oct 02, 2013

    BANGKOK (Reuters) - A Thai court jailed a woman for five years on Wednesday for posting online comments insulting to the monarchy, the second ruling of its kind this week under tough lese majeste laws carrying penalties activists say are too harsh.

    A judge ruled that Noppawan Tangudomsuk, nicknamed "Bento", posted messages in 2008 on the Web board of news website Prachatai that were deemed offensive to the monarchy, a breach of Thailand's Computer Crimes Act, a controversial law passed by a legislature hand-picked by generals after a 2006 coup.

    "Investigations determined the computer's IP address and showed that the messages posted originated from the defendant's computer," said the judge when reading the verdict.

    Thailand has some of the world's toughest lese majeste laws, with royal insults punishable by up to 15 years in prison for each offence committed.

    straitstimes.com

  8. #8
    Mid
    Mid is offline
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,415
    Court overturns verdict against Prachatai webboard user, sentenced to five-year jail term.
    Wed, 02/10/2013

    The Appeals Court today overturned a previous verdict and delivered a five-year sentence to Noppawan (lastname witheld), an online user who was charged in October 2008 under the Computer Crimes Act and lse majest law, or Article 112 of the Criminal Code, for allegedly posting a defamatory comment against the monarchy on the Prachatai.com webboard.

    The user, who went by the nickname "Bento," was detained for ten days in the Womens Correctional Institution after she was arrested in January 2009. She was later acquitted by the Criminal Court in January 2011 because of insufficient evidence.

    The Appeals Court has now overturned the verdict after the prosecution attorney filed an appeal in March 2011 stating that the evidence from the police and attorney was credible. The defendant's attorney is now filing for bail using a 700,000 baht guarantee.

    On Tuesday, the Appeal Court overturned the verdict against Sondhi Limthongkul, leader of the yellow shirt People's Alliance for Democracy who was prosecuted for lse majest and acquitted in July 2012.

    Sondhi was charged for recounting the speech of Daranee Charnchoengsilpakul, red-shirt political activist who was given 15-year jail term for lse majest, during his rally in July 2008.

    The Appeal Court reversed the verdict and sentenced him three years imprisonment, then later reduced to two years. He was granted bail with 500,000 baht guarantee.

    prachatai.com

  9. #9
    Thailand Expat misskit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    21,665
    Thailand’s Supreme Court Acquits Woman of Lese Majeste, Setting Precedent for Similar Cases

    BANGKOK – Thailand’s Supreme Court on Tuesday acquitted Noppawan Tang-udomsuk of lese majeste and computer crime charges in a historic case that will set a precedent for similar cases in the future.

    The case is the first ever in which a defendant of such grave charges fought to the end. In other similar cases, defendants have been advised to plead guilty so the penalties are halved.

    The Supreme Court also on Tuesday set a precedent with the ruling that “an IP address is no proof the defendant was linked to the offensive post”.

    An IP address is a set of numbers assigned to each device in a computer network that uses the internet protocol for communication.

    The court also said even some of the plaintiff witnesses questioned the assumption that an IP address could lead back to the identity of an internet user.

    Tuesday’s ruling reversed the Appeals Court’s decision that sentenced Ms Noppawan to five years in jail.

    Ms Noppawan was accused of writing lese majeste posts on Prachatai.com web-board in 2008, a crime under Section 112 of the Criminal Code and Section 14 of the Computer Crime Act.

    Prosecutors filed the charges in April 2009 and the heart of the court battle was whether an identity can be proved by an IP address.

    The plaintiff used the IP address and phone connection records as evidence the Bangkok Post Reported.

    The defendant insisted she was not the poster, saying her name appeared only as the internet subscriber.

    She explained her house also served as a small factory, with several PCs and many people accessing the internet from them.

    The court of first instance dismissed the case on Jan 31, 2011. It said there were several PCs at the scene but it was not clear which one had been used to send the post. Several employees at the place had also used the internet under the username and password of the defendant.

    Besides, there was no evidence of the post in the PC seized from the defendant and defendant witnesses said IP addresses could be changed easily.

    In October 2013, the Appeal Court reversed the ruling, believing a plaintiff witness from a government agency who insisted the IP address of the poster matched that of the defendant’s notebook.

    He also claimed changing the IP address and hacking into other computers using the defendant’s IP address was no small feat, especially when one would need a username and password of the defendant when posting the message.

    The Appeals Court believed him and sentenced Ms Noppawan to five years in prison.
    Prachatai.com closed its webboard in July 2010, shortly after the case.

    Thailand?s Supreme Court Acquits Woman of Lese Majeste, Setting Precedent for Similar Cases | Chiang Rai Times English Language Newspaper

  10. #10
    RUSH HER TODAY
    david44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 06:24 PM
    Location
    On Peachment
    Posts
    9,560
    Regardless of the merits of the case the article says the IP of the laptop, surely its the line,number or router that has an address? Perhaps Baldrick or someone clued up can confirm this

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •