Comment It |

|

Email it

Print it

Related Stories

Blogger arrested for doing a doggy (story by Rocky's Bru)
NEW HEALTH FOOD: LARD (story by RWDB - JF Beck)
What I say about MSN / Windows Live Messenger (story by Living in Hong Kong)
Keeping Quiet About Thailand (story by Bangkok Pundit)
What About Harry? (story by Bangkok Pundit)
15 Chinese Arrested for Voice Phishing (story by Korea Beat)

Comments

by Ricefield Radio on 11/19/2009 07:55 am http://ricefieldradio.com

Can you actually charge a medical doctor for spreading a medical rumor. As an MD would be classed as an expert witness in any court case they would have to prove that she made a wrong diagnosis and that could bring in evidence that could, most likely, bring forward more rumors. Ahhh the closing circle of ineptitude.

This present government thinks everything is a national security risk, they are paranoid, maybe with reason.

by Veharachan on 11/19/2009 09:17 am

Sadly there are all kinds of chilling effects resulting from these arrests even if there is no justifiable cause for prosecution or enough ground for conviction.
We are backing into a dark tunnel of a backward society.

by Veharachan on 11/19/2009 11:22 am

Ricefield: You are confused. She cannot claim to be an expert when she has not seen the patient and she has not been privy to the medical records of the patient.

by Ricefield Radio on 11/20/2009 10:22 am http://ricefieldradio.com

VC - maybe "Dr Thassaporn admitted she posted false information about the King's health" but she was charged with "posting inaccurate information". One has to wonder what was the accurate information? If her lawyer can prove she posted the information in good faith, it's an opinion. You do not have to see a patient to form an opinion, an astute person with no training can tell if you have a broken leg. In Medical school you learn to process symptoms to make a diagnosis. Possibly she discussed the case with a colleague or just made a professional comment on what was said publicly. In any case it will never get to court or the medical records could become public.

by BKK lawyer on 11/20/2009 02:07 pm

Ricefield: The Post reports that she "accepted the charge," not that she admitted the charge.

I agree that a good faith opinion shouldn't be illegal -- but that proposition applies to anyone, not just experts.

Also agree that if it were to go to court, the medical records would have to become public -- in a fair system anyway.

by SteveCM on 11/20/2009 08:10 pm

"the medical records would have to become public -- in a fair system anyway"

"fair system"? Ah well, that's the end of any notion of seeing anything in (even closed) court then......

Anyhow, given that the monarchy is deemed part of "national security", it seems plain that just about nothing is allowed to even inconvenience it. It rather reminds me of when massive microwave communications towers (20-30 metres tall and often solid concrete) were erected in the UK. Despite being blindingly conspicuous from public roads, they were "secret" and, officially, didn't exist - time was (maybe still is?) that you could be prosecuted for taking a picture of them or even saying where they are.

by CrystalContrail on 11/20/2009 10:47 pm

BKK Lawyer: It's more appropriate to say she "acknowledged the charge". The case is not about her qualifications as an expert witness or the fact that she is an MD. It is about an alleged misuse of the internet under this oppressive and overbroad Computer Crimes Act.

by CrystalContrail on 11/22/2009 01:27 am

Ricefield: Were you drunk?

Name:

E-mail:
(optional)
Comment:

Allowed HTML tags: <B></B>, <I></I>, <A></A>

Are you human?