Thursday, October 1, 2015

# 152 Phnom Penh Post editor Chad Williams lies about Liam Miller




Dear Chad

Since you made your factually incorrect comment about Liam Miller yesterday (a comment that you know to be a lie) this blog has received several comments that present you, personally, in a not very pleasant light. I have deleted these as soon as I became aware of them.

The same occurred back in January when I published on this blog my one-way correspondence with you. You were defamed much as David Fletcher and Liam Miller have been.  I deleted these comments. You did not deserve to be defamed online.

I am republishing the Jan blog entry in the hope you realize what a corner you have painted yourself into. Now you must do whatever you can or need to do to retain whatever credibility is possible for yourself and the Phnom Penh Post under the circumstances.

Are the stories the Phnom Penh Post publishes or chooses not to publish) open to negotiation? ‘Yes, we will publish any and all Scott Neeson press releases’ but ‘No, we will not ask Scott Neeson about his World Housing scam or the girl who died whilst in the case of CCF, or any other questions that might suggest Scott Neeson is anything other than a secular saint.”

Jan blog:

# 89 Chad Williams hoist on his own petard by false allegations made against him

Dear Chad

It was never my intention, when I asked you to imagine yourself in Liam Miller’s shoes, that someone on this blog would, anonymously, place you directly in the same shoes.

The blog entry containing these allegations is factually incorrect. So too is the Post article alleging that Liam Miller was charged with rape. The only difference is that whilst relatively very few people read my blog a lot of people read the Phnom Penh Post; that whilst the Post article defaming Liam Miller is available through google search, the allegations made about you on my blog are not.

There is another and very important difference. Whereas the accuracy of the Post article about Liam Miller has never been challenged in a public forum (until here in my blog) the accuracy of the allegations made about you in the past 12 hours has been challenged in public. I think it is clear to all readers that some ‘troll’ has decided to give you a taste of the Post’s own medicine. Judging by the number of page hits this blog entry has received to date (213) the ‘troll’s’ objectives have been achieved.

False allegations made about anyone, in either the print media or online, highlight the problems inherent in defamatory statements going unchallenged. Once they have been published by the media, and then repeated by others in the media, such allegations come to be treated as facts that require no further evidence to support them. And once they are available to any and everybody through google search the person who has been defamed has little or no chance of having the defamatory material removed.

So it is that Scott Neeson’s allegations about David Fletcher still resonate today and are accepted as fact by so many people. Here is what Scott said about David Fletcher just a week before David Fletcher was arrested in Thailand:

 “There is little doubt Fletcher devotes his time to grooming young girls….The fact is these children can be bought. It’s difficult to stop it. The British Embassy have been told about Fletcher. Many organizations have files on him, but nothing has happened. If you can get this guy sent packing you are doing a service to the children here.”

No-one in the media in Cambodia has challenged this statement of Neeson’s – an allegation that has, this past 5 years, been treated as if it is a fact – despite there being no evidence of its truth that has ever been tested in a court of law.

In a country in which the rule of law prevailed, Scott would have been be sued for defamation for making this statement. His only defense in a properly constituted court would be to provide evidence that his allegation was true – namely that David Fletcher had been grooming young girls. If he could not do so, Scott would lose his case, be publically humiliated and would have to compensate Fletcher financially. So too would Andrew Drummond for the defamatory article he wrote that quotes Neeson. So too would other journalists who have used Neeson, Peter Hogan and Andrew Drummond as reliable sources of factually correct information.

Had David Fletcher had an opportunity to sue for defamation his fate might have been quite different. A public awareness that Scott Neeson (and Andrew Drummond) had lied would have placed the rape allegations made against Fletcher in a different context. Instead of there being a cheer squad on Khmer440 baying for blood, it is possible that there would have been contributors (particularly men) who realized that they too could find themselves in Fletcher’s position as a result of defamatory statements made about them. Had the Phnom Penh Post asked Neeson for evidence of the truth of his allegations, perhaps the Post would have been able to publish a statement long the lines of:

“When asked for evidence that David Fletcher had been grooming young girls Mr Neeson declined to answer.”

There is, of course, no point in David Fletcher suing Scott Neeson in a Cambodian court. Facts, evidence and truth would be irrelevant. The verdict would be decided upon in advance of any hearing  for reasons that are obvious to anyone with the most basic understanding of how the Cambodian judiciary works.

I have asked Scott several times if he has any evidence to back up his claims about David Fletcher grooming young girls. He refuses to answer. And the Phnom Penh Post refuses to ask Scott this question or, indeed, any questions at all about the legality of his removal of children from their families. Scott is a protected species. As is Action Pour les Enfants. As is LICADHO.

Ask Scott to provide the Post with a copy of the pro forma contract he forces parents to sign before taking their children into residential care. He will not do so. Then speak with a cross section of parents of children in CCF residential care and ask them to recount the circumstances under which they were induced to sign such secret ‘contracts’. Then look at the “Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation.” Here is the relevant extract:

Article 8:Definition of Unlawful Removal

The act of unlawful removal removal in this act shall mean to:
1)    Remove a person from his/her current place of residence to a place under the actor’s or a third persons control by means of force, threat, deception, abuse of power, or enticement, or
2)    Without legal authority or any other legal justification to do so to take a minor person under general custody or curatoship or legal custody away from the legal custody of the parents, care taker or guardian.

Article 9: Unlawful removal, inter alia, of Minor

A person who unlawfully removes a minor or a person under general custody or curatorship or legal custody shall be punished with imprisonment for 2 to 5 years.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/7259345/Law-on-Suppression-of-Human-Trafficking-and-Sexual-Exploitation-15022008-English

Is the way in which Scott Neeson obtains signiatures on contracts with the parents of children he takes into residential care legal; in accordance with “Law on Suppression of Human Trafficking and Sexual Exploitation”? Or has he used “threats, deception, abuse of power, or enticement” to secure signiatures on contracts that parents are not allowed to retain copies of?

Just as neither Scott Neeson nor Action Pour les Enfants should be protected from media scrutiny, nor either should LICADHO.

Naly Pilorge claims that LICADHO has arrived at different conclusions about the David Fletcher case to the ones that I have arrived at. Here are her words:

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014, at 04:52 PM, LICADHO Director (Naly Pilorge) wrote:

Dear XXX

“Thanks for your email. We are following the case, our findings differ from James Ricketson but we cannot reveal the details of the case to protect the parties involved, thanks.

Naly

Naly Pilorge
Director”

What are LICADHO’S ‘findings’? And which parties are being protected? APLE, an NGO that specifically requested David Fletcher not be granted a ‘re-trial’? Yang Dany, who had been spirited off to China by APLE because she and her mother were going to tell the truth in court?

Given LICADHO’S refusal to even send a representative to court to observe what was supposed to be Mr Fletcher’s ‘re-trial’ in Nov 2014, it is clear that Naly believes herself to be in possession of facts, of evidence, that the Phnom Penh Municipal Court is not in possession of. (I am in possession of all the documents) To be more precise, Naly knows that David Fletcher is guilty – regardless of any doctors reports; regardless of Yang Dany’s denials. Naly Pilorge, representing LICADHO, has set herself up as investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury and believes the 10 year jail sentence for David Fletcher is fair and just and that he is not entitled to a trial at which he is able to present a defense. This, from the Director of Cambodia’s pre-eminent human rights NGO!

Naly Pilorge can feel secure in playing the roles of prosecutor, judge and jury because the Phnom Penh Post (nor any other newspaper) will not challenge her; will ask no questions at all in relation to this case.

The same applies for Action Pour les Enfants. Thierry Darnaudet and Samleang Serila likewise have get-out-of-jail free cards that leave them free of any scrutiny by the Post.

The Phnom Penh Post had more than one journalist in court the day on which David Fletcher’s trial was to occur – as promised by the same judges three weeks earlier. The Post journalists heard the APLE lawyer oppose David Fletcher’s right to a trial. The Post journalists saw the judges refusing to accept any evidence from David Fletcher; saw the judges refuse Fletcher the right to speak on his own behalf and saw them, after a 15 minute break, read a long  statement that had clearly been written before the days proceedings explaining why they had decided against allowing David Fletcher a trial. And what story did the Post publish about the travesty of justice that occurred in court that day? Nothing. The clear breach of Mr Fletcher’s human and legal rights did not warrant even a paragraph in the Post!

Again I ask you, Chad, to place yourself in the position of someone (like Fletcher or Miller) accused of a serious crime for which there is no evidence of your guilt. Imagine appearing in court and seeing Phnom Penh Post journalists taking notes. Lots of notes. And then you discover the following day, in the days to come, that the Post has published no story at all. How would you feel? What would you think? Would you feel inclined to speculate as to why the Post remained diplomatically silent?

I will, in the next 24 hours, remove all references on my blog to the false allegations made against you so that there is no possibility that these may be found by anyone through a google search; such that there is no chance that you may, at some point in the future, find yourself in precisely the same position as Liam Miller.

I trust that you will extend the same courtesy to Liam Miller.

best wishes

James Ricketson

http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2015/01/89-chad-williams-hoist-on-his-own.html

71 comments:

  1. Chad Williams and the Phnom Penh Post have zero credibility! Williams continues to defame Liam in yesterday's posting! I believe that he has the integrity of a snake. Yes, I remember one posting that you refer to and am more inclined to believe that there is some truth to it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. following all of this has convinced me of one thing; Cambodia is a terrible place to visit; to live; to attempt to help those in need; Cambodia could very well be the worse place in the world;
    Not until people stop supporting this underserved country will anyone listen; maybe its already to late;
    I have always been a careful shopper, checking where an item is made before buying it...........I stopped or reduced buying made in China a lot time ago.........Last year I discovered a lot of things sold in America are made in Cambodia; but they are not bought by me. it seems the only thing that speaks there is money.....perhaps the lack of it will speak even louder;

    ReplyDelete
  3. Michael Hayes, where are you? We need you. You were an editor with integrity. You were not for sale. We could accept that if you published a story in the Phnom Penh Post that it was true or as close to the truth as it is possible to get in Cambodia. You did not have an agenda. The PPP now has a variety of agendas and readers have to wonder who is paying the bills to guarantee that these agendas are serviced. One agenda is obviously CCF's need to be forever in the public eye as an NGO doing good work. Fuck that. What about the bad work! The scams. Does Neeson pay the PPP NOT to write anything negative about him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it is a great shame that a once high quality newspaper is now subject to the whims of an editor who believes it to be more important for the PPP to publish factually incorrect press releases from APLE than to take note of, and report, the actual judgement made by the courts about Mr Miller's case. The kindest thing one can say about the way in which the Phnom Penh Post has handled the reporting on Liam Miller's case is that it has been totally incompetent. As will be apparent from what Mr Miller has written, he has paid a very high price for this journalistic incompetence.

      Delete
    2. Isn't it the objective of a newspaper to get the facts straight? Seems Chad Williams and the Phnom Penh Post have failed miserably!

      Delete
  4. Let me get this straight, Chad:

    A Cambodian court finds a person guilty of a crime, even if there is no evidence of his or her guilt.

    The Phnom Penh Post publishes a story that says nothing other than that So and So was found guilty.

    Anyone who questions the validity of the court verdict is a conspiracy theorist?

    Am I missing something?

    Looking forward to hearing back from you, Chad

    ReplyDelete
  5. Who knows where this guy lives in Phnom Penh?

    ReplyDelete
  6. This morning contacted both Chris Dawe and Chad Williams on their contact page , left my e mail address .

    .. # 1 . To alert Chris Dawe to what .Chad Williams had put on this Blog .
    #2 To ask for answers from both of them regarding what conviction were they referring to .?

    What stories was Chad referring to ?

    I never been convicted of anything , nothing absolutely nothing.
    In the strongest terms I reminded them I am owed an explanation, , a retraction and apology
    .
    I do not expect to receive an answer , as they have never answered me before .
    .Chris Dawe, both you and Chad Williams , plus your newspaper have no credibility no ethics , no morality.
    You are disgrace to the Profession of Journalism
    Liam Miller

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Post's editorial policy is for sale to the highest bidders and we know who they are

      Delete
    2. Chad

      You, as editor, and Chris Dawe, are free of course to adopt whatever editorial policy you choose. If you wish to act as a mouthpiece for Scott Neeson. CCF and APLE this is your prerogative. I hope that you do not think you are fooling many people as to your clear editorial biases.

      The scams practiced by Neeson and CCF are many and varied and should be llooked at with a critical eye. But whose critical eye. There is no body and nobody in Cambodia or elsewhere that is going to take a close look and ask questions. In the 'developed world' this task often falls to journalists and newspapers. They pick up the ball that has been dropped by regulatory bodies, do some research, make some phone calls to ask questions and then write pieces that are critical of, or at least ask questions of, the rich and powerful who are abusing their position of trust.

      The easiest of Neeson'[s various scams to investigate does not require more than half an hour of work. It is the World Housing scam. The houses are not 'gifted' to poor families. They are 'gifted' to CCF. Both Neeson and World Housing have lied. Simple as that.

      If the Post was interested in more than merely publishing CCF press releases, you might like to make a call to Scot Neeson and ask him who owns the land upon which the 'gifted' houses have been erected. The answer to this question will let you know who is benefiting financially from this scam.

      Neeson will go to great lenghts NOT to answer this question. So too will James Mc Cabe, Alan Lemon and the CCF board.

      However, I would have thought that a journalist with a little initiative could access land title documents and find out who owns the land. Is it Neeson himself? Is it his Country Manager? Who is getting a whole lot of free houses and making money renting them to the poor families that developers in Vancouver thought they were giving to poor families? And do these developers know that Neeson did not bother with plumbing so that the houses now stand in a sea of sewage? ANd what is Neeson doing to solve the problem? He is in New York raising more money to....to what...?

      Now, if this little exercise raises questions in your mind, as editor, and in the mind of whatever journalist takes a close look at the World Housing scam, perhaps you could start asking questions about the 3 and 4 kids to a bed allegations that are made by ALL kids who have been resident in CCF dormitories. Are they all lying? Ask Scott. See if you can get a straight answer from him. You won't be able to.

      And so on. Once you open the can of worms that is CCF you will find many more scams than Somaly Mam ever engaged in. Far more.

      A time will come, of course, when Neeson is not protected by his money and power., His House of Cards will collapse and all those who stood by and turned a blind eye to his scams (including the PHNOM PENH POST) will have egg on their faces.

      I have no idea what hold Neeson has on the POST but whatever it is, it will only be of advantage to you in the short term. In the long terms all those who gave Neeson and CCF a free pass and merely published his press releases will look pretty foolish.

      Delete
  7. In an article published in the Cambodia Daily, a Phnom Penh Post writer was successfully sued for defamation. It appears that the PPP corrected the story to avoid prosecution. Predictably, Chad Williams had ‘no comment’. The entire story is here: https://www.cambodiadaily.com/archives/journalist-convicted-of-defamation-for-blog-post-64800/

    Oh, what the hell, here it is too: Journalist Convicted of Defamation for Blog Post
    BY HAY PISEY AND HOLLY ROBERTSON | JULY 24, 2014
    A British journalist has been convicted of defaming a French property developer in a blog post in an unprecedented ruling that has been described as a blow to freedom of expression in Cambodia.
    Rupert Winchester, a former property reporter for the Phnom Penh Post, was on Wednesday ordered by the Phnom Penh Municipal Court to pay $25,000 in damages to Etienne Chenevier, the director of CityStar Private Equity Asia, and fined a further $2,000.
    The case stemmed from a June 2013 post on Mr. Winchester’s blog, The Mighty Penh, in which he claimed CityStar planned to knock down a colonial-era property opposite the National Museum to build a seven-story condominium.
    In the post, which has since been removed, he quoted Mr. Chenevier as saying: “I strongly deny it. Why would we want to knock down our own building? If you say we will, I will sue you.”
    Mr. Winchester then invited the businessman to “knock yourself out” and described his business attributes in an unfavorable manner.
    Judge Ros Piseth said people should be more careful when pushing unsubstantiated information into the public sphere.
    “[If you] say something bad about others it [could lead to] a defamation case,” he said.
    In a statement released ahead of the verdict, the Overseas Press Club of Cambodia (OPCC) expressed concern that a conviction could set a dangerous precedent.
    Rick Valenzuela, president of the OPCC, said in the statement: “With the government gearing up to pass a draft Cybercrime Law that falls well below international standards for privacy and freedom of expression, a guilty verdict against Winchester will have a further chilling effect on what is said or written on the Internet in Cambodia, by journalists or anybody else.”
    Speaking after Wednesday’s verdict, Mr. Winchester said he planned to appeal.
    “I think Chenevier is trying to bully me into acquiescing using his vast resources,” he said.
    Mr. Winchester had also reported about CityStar for the Phnom Penh Post. The article no longer appears on the newspaper’s website.
    Kong Rady, Mr. Chenevier’s lawyer, said his client had pursued Mr. Winchester as an individual, not a journalist, because the newspaper had corrected the story.
    Phnom Penh Post editor-in-chief Chad Williams declined to comment on the case.
    The building brought into question in Mr. Winchester’s blog post remains occupied and standing.
    pisey@cambodiadaily.com, robertson@cambodiadaily.com

    ReplyDelete
  8. Just in case James and Liam might believe that their posts had no impact: Doing a Google search for CHAD WILLIAM PHNOM PENH POST, three of the top eight results reflect this blog. I think this blog will follow him for a very long time. Link: https://www.google.co.th/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=chad%20williams%20phnom%20penh%20post

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for this, Anonymous 6.42

      'Google' should make all of us aware of just how important it is to get our facts right before publishing anything that winds up on the internet.

      I have been accused many times of getting my facts wrong on this blog but, to date, no-one has pointed out to me which facts I have got wrong. If they do I will correct my mistakes. I do not want, one year down the track or ten years down the track, to have someone pointing out where I have my facts wrong and so discrediting all the facts I have right.

      If anyone reading this can point out to me where I am factually incorrect I will correct accordingly.

      Delete
    2. I really left it to show Liam that he could sue and win. Even has the name of the attorney that won.

      Delete
  9. Never heard of Liam Miller before reading this blog. Tried googling his name for the Post article. Couldn't find the Post article at first, but got dozens of results leading back to this blog, which associates his name with rape charges and other convicted sex offenders denying their guilt. Only after I found his full name was i abke to find the Post article on him. So now, as a very casual reader of such stories, I associate his name with accused rapists and pedos claiming innocence be ause of this blog. I don't think this blog is doing Liam any favors, even if the intent is to help.

    Has Liam written a letter to the editor of the Post for publication? (Not just argry letters demanding retractions and such.)

    Why hasn't Liam simply sued the Post for defamation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous Oct 2, 10.02 PM . my answer is on Blog 151 , Oct 1/5.18 AM .. Liam Miller.
      Since 2011 after my arrest and release from prison I have been unemployable because of the google post.
      I now live on an aged pension , previously I was a lecturer at a University ,recent surgery has eaten into my savings too so even if APLE are brought down to launch court proceedings in Cambodia financially would be difficult .
      Please also check posts 108 and 88 and 89 ..

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous 10.02

      I had never heard of Liam Miller either until he made contact with me.

      Before I published anything about his case, back in Jan this year, I sought his permission to do so. He gave it to me. I was well aware that thr chances were high that this blog would make more people aware of the allegations against him. These were, and remain, false allegations. That is clear to anyone who bothers to look at the court documents. There is no doubt here. APLE deliberately defamed Liam Miller with a false press release and the Phnom Penh Post, either out of malice or incompetence, simply reported on what APLE had announced.

      My suspicion is that there was no malice intended. It was simply a journalistic mistake of the kind that can occur; a mistake that could have been rectified (and should have been rectified) as soon as the Post became aware of it.

      That the Post did not apologise or retract what it had published is a serious error of judgement. That the Post does not, now, simply make an apology, reveals a newspaper that does not care how its inaccurate reportage affects the lives of people being written about.

      Even at this very late stage, the Post should do whatever it can to rectify its mistake and help Liam Miller restore the reputation he lost when the original article was published.

      Delete
  10. On the question of suing the Post, this should not be necessary.the Post should retract and apologise. Simple as that.

    Having had some first and second hand experience with the Cambodian judicial system I think that suing the Post would be a waste of time and money as the outcome of the case would have nothing at all to do with facts,with evidence. this is the elephant in the room that everyone talks about in private but which they pussy-foot around in public.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Once again Ricketson, you believe that you are dealing with ethical and decent people (Chad Williams Phnom Penh Post). From the result, it is clear that you are not! They have not retracted or apologized and likely won't without a lawsuit that can be won.

      Delete
  11. Hey, Chad Williams, silence is not a viable option for you here. You are the editor of a fucking newspaper. "No comment" is not good enough. You have no credibility as a journalist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think we need to include the names of his English speaking staff so they can take an interest in what kind of a leader they have!

      Delete
  12. It would be difficult to believe that his staff could read (this entire story) about the harm that this false story on Liam has done and not believe he is not a weasel. Or his wife, neighbors and children?

    Staff that might have interest in how their leader operates (partial list):

    Tep Thoeun Thyda
    Bun Phalla
    Buth Reaksmey K
    Cam McGrath
    Cheng Sereyrith
    Cheng Sokha
    Chhay Channyda
    Chhim Sreyneang
    Daniel Pye
    Griff Tapper
    Harriet Fitch Little
    Hor Kimsay
    Joe Curtin
    Khouth Sophak C.
    Kim Sarom
    Meas Sokchea
    Michael Philips
    Mom Kunthear

    ReplyDelete
  13. @ Anonymous October 4, 2015 at 3:25 AM

    You have to add Phnom Penh Post Subeditor Sean Teehan, who once claimed to be researching former APLE country Director Katherine Keane, who resigned from APLE because she couldn't accept being forced to write sexual abuse reports for Thierry Darnaudet that weren't true.

    Sean Teehan has discredited himself by not answering any questions on the subject, which makes one believe that he works for the APLE counter intelligence team helping the org to deny any transparency in it's controversial work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In defence of Sean Teehan, Katherine Keane does not want to be found. I have been trying for a year, have tracked her down but can get no responses to her that either confirm or deny allegations that she was told to fabricate sexual abuse reports.

      Delete
  14. For your info.

    My provider blocks ANY internet access. The team is working hard to profile everyone participating on your blog. Perhaps they plan a shutdown or worse on members of the blog. PARANOIA at work?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What kind of provider doesn't provide internet access? What do they provide??

      Delete
    2. I don't understand this statement!!!

      In the event that this blog is shut down, it will merely re-emerge. All that is written here is being backed up.

      Delete
  15. Many stand to lose as the truth gets out. Ricketson has turned up many truths!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. More questions than truths. There is still much to discover. It is not easy since virtually no-one answers questions in Cambodia. This applies to NGOs, to human rights ground (LICADHO, AD HOC) and many journalists - like those working for the Phnom Penh Post.

      There are very few people or organisations in Cambodia that are genuinely committed to the precepts of transparency and accountability. Working in the shadows is more their style; informing by press release rather than being open to being challenged in question and answer form.

      Delete
  16. A thought: If the Post published what somebody said, e.g. "Cambodian police said the Liam Miller was charged with rape..." or "Scott Neeson said that Fletch was grooming young girls," then even if it turns out later that those statements were untrue, the Post's report would still be accurate because those people did say those things, and there is no particular obligation for the Post to retract what was an accurate article. Nor do they have to follow up on the story if they don't want.

    Also, if Liam was originally charged with rape, etc, and then those charges were later changed/reduced to sexual harassment, then the Post's article is again accurate, there is no obligation to retract, or even follow up is they choose not to.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous Oct 12.55 AM .. You logic is warped. So if someday makes a false and damaging statement about you PPP publishes it is OK and they do not have to retract it even when they are given evidence that it was wrong , (please look at libel laws ), if a statement is wrong and can be proven to be wrong it is libel .. not based on what someone said !!! Newspapers like all of us have to be ac countable for our actions, newspapers more so because of the damage they can do .

    The Cambodian Police and the Siem Riep Court never charged me with rape never !

    Please do not indulge yourself with pernicious fantasy ..

    The Investigating Judge at The Siem Riep Court was Judge was Judge HOK Pov , please check with him .
    After my initial interview with him he said that the charges were sexual harassment rape was never mentioned .
    You Have not bothered to look for facts , please look at post 108 here also there is a copy of the Court Judgement On this Blog .
    Not one of your insidious fantasies are correct or based on fact .

    The PPP copied the lies given to them by APLE , not given by the police or the court
    The Cambodian Daily on the same day quoted the same police officer saying it has not yet been decided what the charges would be !
    I would like a reply from you however please base any accusations on fact , do some homework , not more fantasy
    Liam Miller

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Happens everyday in the newspapers. Most newspaper reporting is just that, reporting what has been said or witnessed by others and attributing those reports, especially mundane facts like specific charges against somebody, and especially for dailies. Investigation is a narrow area of journalism, not the norm. Granted, they are obligated not to engage in frivolous reporting of what some random guy on the street claims, or at least find secondary confirmation, but established authorities like respected NGOs and the government officials announcing mundane facts or the results of their investigations are generally fair game unless there is some good reason to suspect otherwise.

      If the PPP reports that the "Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office said that you were charged with x," then even if you weren't charged with x, the report is still accurate and does not require a retraction from the paper since the government official did in fact say that. If they see some value in it or are feeling kindly disposed to you they may later follow up that article with another that would include something like "contrary to initial reports from the Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office, Mr. Williams was not charged with x, but y, etc," but they are under no obligation to do so because they were not in error. Your beef would not be with the newspaper for failing to give your story the follow-up attention that you feel it deserves, but with the authority that misreported the charges to the paper. If you feel that the paper is not following up something that you think they should, you are free to send a letter to the editor (usually around the time of the article so it is still relevant to the reading public) that the newspaper should publish. It might even spark a follow up or at least a response.

      Here is what I found the PPP said about you:

      "Siem Reap Provincial Court has charged a British national with sexually assaulting three female domestic workers in Siem Reap town. Sun Bunthorng, head of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office, said William Mathieson Miller, 69, an English teacher, was arrested and charged yesterday with rape, attempted rape and sexual assault." http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/british-national-charged-rape-assault

      Delete
    2. Alas, the exigencies of time and other responsibilities do not allow me to respond to this comment in the detail it deserves.

      (1) Who can/should newspapers fee free to quote without bothering the check to see if the facts are correct

      "established authorities like respected NGOs and the government officials announcing mundane facts or the results of their investigations are generally fair game unless there is some good reason to suspect otherwise."

      There is, by now, good reason to take with a huge grain of salt press releases put out by APLE; for journalists to at least ask of APLE: "Is this factually correct."

      If this basic fact checking had been done, APLE could have lied or admitted:

      (2) Liam Miller was never charged with rape.

      In short, APLE has lied to the Phnom Penh Post.

      (3) Was the following comment posted by someone pretending to be Chad Williams?

      "AnonymousOctober 1, 2015 at 12:17 AM

      Thanks for the veiled threats but they dont work with me. In answer to your question, you have both been convicted by a court and we have already run the stories in the paper. There is no requirement to continue writing stories about conspiracy theories. There are more important matters to report in Cambodia at the moment. Regards, Chad"

      If Chad did not write this comment he should come out and say so. If he did write the comment, he is factually incorrect. Again! Despite the many documents he has been sent that reveal that Liam Miller was never charged with rape.

      (4) The bulk of the comments that I have deleted from the this blog have been defamatory statements about Chad Williams. They were 'frivolous', defamatory and may well have been one person's attempt to discredit Chad. Why are these comments any different from those made by APLE - an organisation that has shown, time and time again, that it will use press releases to defame, to denigrate and to present as 'facts', information that APLE knows to be untrue.

      By publishing such statements, without bothering to check their factual accuracy, the Post becomes a PR arm of APLE. The same applies with Scott Neeson's Cambodian Children's Fund. Scott is also parsimonious with the truth and nothing he writs in a press statement or on Facebook should be taken at face value. He is a marketing person and has discovered that the Post will publish any press release he provides the newspaper with.

      This is not good enough.

      Delete
    3. 1) You and a few others may believe that APLE is not a credible source, but at least at this point in time, this is a fringe view, and regardless, not to the point of what Sun Bunthorng of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office said or didn't say. While I appreciate the hard work you have put into documenting the failings of APLE, your view of them is currently a minority view, likely a very small minority that spends a lot of time talking to itself. And you need to be realistic about that.

      2) The Post article says that "Sun Bunthorng, head of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office, said William Mathieson Miller, 69, an English teacher, was arrested and charged yesterday with rape, attempted rape and sexual assault." It does not say APLE. So far I see no evidence that APLE said this and not Sun Bunthorng. To the contrary, the Post article is quite explicit that Sun Bunthorng said it.

      Whether Liam was charged with rape or not is not to the point that (according to the Post) Sun Bunthorng of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office told the Post that he was, and that is what the Post reported.

      3) I don't know if Chad wrote that or not, but if Sun Bunthorng told the post that Liam was charged with rape, then strictly speaking, the Post was not in error and there is nothing for them to retract, let alone apologize for. This 'Chad' is correct. If the Post so chooses, they could follow up more on the case, perhaps bring out this supposedly erroneous statement by Sun Bunthorng, but that would probably require the Post see some journalistic value in following it up or at least feel kindly disposed to Liam, which I seriously doubt threatening and maligning them is going to inspire. Unless there is some evidence Sun Bunthorng did not say this to the Post, they have the upper hand in this debate.

      Do you or Liam have any evidence that Sun Bunthorng of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office did not say this to the Post? Documents showing that Liam was not charged with rape, or the Cambodia Daily saying Sun Bunthorng said something different to them do not amount to evidence that Sun Bunthorng did not tell the Post he was charged with rape. The former shows only that at some point he was charged with sexual harassment, not that he wasn't charged with rape at some point or that Sun Bunthorng did not say that he was charged with rape (even if Sun Bunthorng was in error when he said it.) The latter would indicate only that he said different things to different reporters, (for any number of possible reasons), not that he didn't say it to the Post or that APLE said it. The question here regarding the Post is about attribution/misattribution, not whether Liam was charged with rape or not.

      Delete
  18. Check with the police officer Sun Bunthrong , he did not say that I had been charged with what you mention in fact in the Cambodian Daily on the same day that the PPP article was printed " said that That Sun Bunthrong said that it had not yet been decided what the charges would be ."

    The PPP printed word for word what was on the APLE website , they were behind the whole investigation and had the motivation for having the lies published about me .
    Read Blogs 88 and 89 there are also many more posts here about my case here that will answer your questions
    IF YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT KNOWING THE TRUTH?

    Again please do some homework and get your facts right .
    It seems that your trying to avoid the facts .
    Liam Miller

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re:the Khmertimes and Phnom Penh Post refusal to report the truth

      Both Newspapers have made very similar statements, like "we have more important things to report on", while being complicit in APLE's News-Conditioning. To them it does not matter wether someone is locked up on charges that are factually untrue. This is the case with David Fletcher (no rape took place) as well as in Liam Millers case. If the morality has sunken to such a low why should anyone bother to read these papers ?

      Delete
    2. It is not incumbent on me to find support for your dissenting argument, but on you as the dissenter to provide evidence for your claim.

      To review: The Post reported provincial Anti-Human Trafficking office said you were charged with rape. You say you have documents the show you were not charged with rape, but with something else. And the Daily said something else. You seem to conclude from this that the Post was wrong and should therefore print a retraction. This does not follow.

      The Post reported that the Anti-Human Trafficking office said you were charged with rape. Your documents showing you weren't so charged are not evidence that the Anti-Human Trafficking office did not tell the Post you were charged with rape. To show that the Post was wrong you need evidence that the Anti-Human Trafficking office did not say this to them. If as you claim the Daily reported that the AntiHuman Trafficking office said something different, that is still not evidence that they did not say different things to different reporters, for any number of possible reasons. In lieu of evidence that the Anti-Human Trafficking office did not tell the Post you were charged with rape, the Post has the upper hand in this debate.

      Further, if you do manage to come up with evidence that an APLE quote was misattributed to Sun Bunthorng by the Post, I don't think it will do much to improve your public image, especially since you have chosen to splash your name all over internet in association with convicted sex offenders claiming innocence. This is not a group that fares well in the public mind. Your efforts would seem to have taken a tiny article from a tiny rag and greatly expanded and compounded its coverage and potential influence.

      Delete
    3. The lessons to be learned here are:

      (a) Just because someone in a position of authority in Cambodia says that something is so, does not necessarily mean that it is so.

      (b) When it transpires that the person in a position of authority has provided false information (either by mistake or knowingly) it is incumbent on a newspaper (or a blogger) to correct the error.

      I doubt that there is any man reading this blog who would be happy to have, floating around on the internet, the allegation that he had been charged with rape when he had not been.

      The Post may well have the upper hand in a legalistic debate, but so what?

      See my letter below to Chad from Jan this year in which I tried to make Mr Miller's dilemma/suffering real for Chad.

      Delete
  19. Dear Chad Williams

    At 12.17 1st Oct, someone left a comment on my blog that appears to have been written by yourself. If it was not, if someone was pretending to be you, please let me know. And let the readers of this blog know.

    If you did write the comment, you are 100$% factually incorrect in your assertion that Liam Miller was “convicted by a court” and you need to both retract the statement and apologize for having made it.

    Here is what ‘Chad’ wrote:

    Anonymous October 1, 2015 at 12:17 AM

    Thanks for the veiled threats but they dont work with me. In answer to your question, you have both been convicted by a court and we have already run the stories in the paper. There is no requirement to continue writing stories about conspiracy theories. There are more important matters to report in Cambodia at the moment. Regards, Chad

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mr. Ricketson

    I have referred your blog and defamatory comments to our lawyers. i have been advised to not make any further comment as our lawyers will be handling this from now.

    Regards

    Chad Williams.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If this is really a comment from Chad Williams, and you really want to go down this path, so be it.

      Delete
    2. Well done Chad - about time someone put this disgusting and vile blog back where it belongs! I can't wait for your lawyers to take action.

      Delete
    3. Well we will all wait and wait and wait! Enjoy your wait Anonymous 9:15!!

      Delete
    4. No enjoy yours - while you look over your shoulder wondering if you are gong to be sued or not!

      Delete
    5. Grasping at straws now aren't you? Ha-ha!

      Delete
  21. Liam Miller is full of his own press - if he was so righteous in thinking that he has done nothing wrong at all, including not sexually assaulting any person, then he would of taken his matter to the courts and sued the papers. But he hasn't, and the reason he hasn't is because ehe isn't entirely innocent!

    ReplyDelete
  22. The onus is not on Liam Miller to prove that he has not committed a crime. The onus is on the judicial system to prove that he did commit a crime. The judicial system found that he did not. The Phnom Penh Post misreported what happened and should have corrected its error as soon as it became aware of it. This is a matter of professional ethics.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So once again - if Liam Miller is so innocent, why hasn't he sued the newspaper?

      Delete
  23. Not only should the Post print a retraction and apologize to Liam, they should also publicly admonish APLE for providing the false information.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thats not the job of a newspaper - its the job of judiciary - its called civil action. Why hasn't this Miller guy sued the papers, or submitted an official complaint to the courts and requested the courts to order the paper to retract the statement or face civil action?

      Delete
    2. Liam Miller is a pensioner without assets who does not live in Cambodia. For him to take on the Phnom Penh Post in a Cambodian court would be an exercise in futility. It should not be necessary for him to do so. A simple retraction and apology would have sufficed years ago and would probably suffice now, though I don't wish to speak on Mr Miller's behalf.

      Delete
  24. It would be very easy to get caught up in a complex, convoluted and legalistic dialogue about who said what and when, about attributed and misattributed comments etc.

    I prefer to see this on a human level; as a matter of personal and professional ethics. I can't really add much more to what I write to Chad back in Jan this year:

    Chad Williams
    Editor
    Phnom Penh Post

    25th Jan 2015

    Dear Chad

    If the Phnom Penh Post cannot be relied upon to accurately report cases involving allegations of rape and sexual abuse, can the Post be relied upon to report anything accurately?

    I am writing to you again regarding the Phnom Penh Post’s factually incorrect published report that William Mathieson (Liam) Miller had been charged with rape.

    I have written to you three times about this now. You have not responded. Nor have you responded in any way to Liam Miller’s letters and emails.

    I also wrote to you last year in relation to a similarly false report regarding two rape charges laid against David Fletcher. You did not reply.

    It is in the nature of fast turnover journalism, with deadlines to meet, that errors of fact can be made. Once such errors have been pointed out to journalists, editors and newspaper proprietors, however, they should be corrected immediately and an apology made that is appropriate to the error. This is especially the case when factually incorrect reportage has a seriously damaging effect on the life of an individual about whom a story has been written.

    In the case of Liam Miller the results of the Post’s factually incorrect article, available through google search, have been disastrous. It has destroyed Mr Miller’s career (he is now unemployable) and caused painful rifts within his family, members of which believe that the Phnom Penh Post report about his being charged with rape is accurate.

    These family rifts could be healed if there was public acknowledgement, from the Post, that the article regarding Mr Miller’s having been charged with rape was totally untrue. The same applies to his ability to find work.

    ...to be continued...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You say that you don't want to be bothered with details and accuracy (ie "legalistic dialogue"), and that you want to take a more "human" approach. And yet, from the very first sentence of your letter to Chad you don't treat him with the respect or humanity, and you make factually incorrect claims with legal implications - claims that if you bothered understanding the so-called "legalistic dialogue" you would realize are factually incorrect. In your first sentence you accuse the Post of "inaccurate reporting." As I have already fairly well established, there is no evidence of inaccurate reporting. The Post reported what Bunthorng said, and there is no evidence that he did not say that. You then go on to demand "retractions" and "apologies" to which you are not entitled, as if the Post did something wrong, which they didn't. This is both insulting and would have legal implications. You then go on to try and make it personal, questioning Chad's integrity thus making it even more insulting. If you want to take a "human" approach, you have to bear in mind that editors and journalists are humans too. If you hound them and insult them and falsely claim they have committed some wrong with legal implications, it is little wonder that they do not respond positively. While the Post is under no obligation to offer and apology or retraction, they were and are capable of pulling the story from internet and/or of doing a followup story which would likely include a clarification of the charges, but your tactics of accusing them of wrongdoing, of insulting and threatening them, of demanding more than you are entitled to, and of manipulatively trying to enlist them in your anti-APLE agenda, would, I imagine, leave them little choice - personally, legally and professionally - but to ignore your requests, and perhaps even seek legal remedy. Though I think, at bottom, you may be fighting the good fight, you are often your own worst enemy.

      Delete
    2. Letter # 2 to Chad Williams

      I received no response:


      “Dear Chad

      I am not sure if you are the right person to be directing this question at but, if you are not, could you please pass it on to the relevant person?

      I have, on my blog in the past 24 hours, had a comment posted by a man by the name of Liam Miller. He alleges that the Phnom Penh Post published an article about him that was factually incorrect and defamatory; that the Post refused to retract the article.

      http://cambodia440.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/76-when-it-comes-to-accusations-of.html

      Does the Phnom Penh Post stand by the factual accuracy of the 2011 article? If not, will the Phnom Penh Post, even at this late date, publish a retraction and request of Google that it remove the article from its search engine?

      best wishes

      James Ricketson

      Delete
    3. Letter # 3 to Chad Williams

      I received no response:


      Chad Williams
      Editor in Chief Department
      Phnom Penh Post

      6th Jan 2015

      Dear Chad

      I have received no response to the message I sent to you yesterday re Liam Miller.

      I am now in possession of both Mr Miller’s letter to the Phnom Penh Post and the Siem Reap Provincial Court of First Instance ‘Nonsuit Order’ dated March 12th 2011.

      In light of Mr Miller’s having not been charged with the offences the Phnom Penh Post reported (“rape, attempted rape and sexual assault”), will the Post be writing a retraction and an apology for the damage the article has done to Mr Miller’s reputation? And will the Post be requesting that Google remove the inaccurate and defamatory 14th March article published two days after the ‘Nonsuit Order’ of 12th March was handed down?

      best wishes

      James Ricketson



      Delete
    4. Letter # 4 to Chad Williams

      I received no response:


      Chad Williams
      Editor in Chief Department
      Editorial Edition
      Post English

      Dear Chad

      My previous attempts to communicate with you via the Post’s online ‘contact’ address have failed. My attempts to communicate with you via David Boyle, whose email address I do have, have failed also.

      You will be well aware that there has never been any suggestion, in any police or court document, that William Mathieson Miller raped anyone. The very worst that was alleged was that Mr Miller may have touched a young woman’s hand inadvertently. In any event, all sexual harassment charges against him were found to be false – for reasons outlined by Judge Hok Pov in his summation of the case.

      The Phnom Penh Post’s article has caused enormous damage to Mr Miller’s reputation, his employment prospects and his relationship with those close family members who believe that what the Phnom Penh Post published was true. Given that what was published was demonstrably not true I ask again, on Mr Miller’s behalf, that the Post apologize, issue a retraction and have the offending article removed from the internet such that it cannot be found through Google search.

      best wishes

      James Ricketson

      Delete
    5. As you can see, Anonymous 2.42, the letter to which you refer was my 5th.

      I am not sure how many emails and letters Liam Miller had written previously, but all were ignored.

      Under the circumstances I think that my 5th letter was quite reasonable.

      Delete
    6. This is an example of what I just said. You demand a "retraction" and "apology" to which Liam is not entitled since the Post made no error, and would have legal implications, and you do it repeatedly, which is 'hounding' as I said. I don't mean this in an insulting way, but really, do you listen to yourself? What you want and may have been able to get is a follow-up, not a retraction and apology, but now the whole thing is poisoned with ill feelings and legal complications.

      Delete
    7. The Post made an error. It published a story that was factually incorrect. t could have solved the problem as soon as it was pointed out that a mistake had been made. Instead, the Post decided to tough it out and to hell with the impact the story had on Liam Miller.

      Before I even became aware of this matter, the Post had had 3 years to sort out the problem. ANd, when I wrote my first letter in Jan, the Post could quite easily have written to Mr Miller, opened up a channel of communication, and sorted out the best way to solve the problem.
      There are ways in which this could have been achieved (a cleverly worded follow up) without The Post leaving itself exposed legally.

      Delete
    8. "The Post made an error. It published a story that was factually incorrect."

      If Bunthorng said what the Post reported he said, the Post did not make an error, nor did it publish a story that was factually inaccurate. It accurately reported what Bunthorng said, which, if Liam's claim is correct, was factually inaccurate. This is an important distinction.

      If Sam Rainsy says "Vietnamese hold 75% of the LLCs" when in fact they only hold 25% of the LLCs, and the Post reports what Sam Rainsy said, the Post has not made an error nor published a factually inaccurate story. They accurately reported what Sam Rainsy said, even though Sam Rainsy's statement was factually incorrect. And as such there is no reason for a retraction or apology to the Vietnamese.

      I don't know in what way Liam approached the Post, but if it was anything like this, with accusations of errors and complicity in conspiracies and demands for retractions and public apologies, it is little wonder he didn't get it. Nor is it a mystery why they haven't gone out of their way in the last 3 years to help him.

      And we haven't even begun to talk about whether Liam's documents fully counter what the Post reported Bunthorng said, or whether that would require additional investigation.

      Delete
    9. Dear Anonymous 3.54

      This is a circular discussion and I am not sure how much longer we can continue with it without repeating ourselves.

      According the logic you are using here I can do the following with no qualms:

      (1 ) A person makes a factually incorrect statement on this blog which I accept as being the truth.

      (2) It transpires that the statement was not true.

      (3) I refuse to retract or apologise on the grounds that I am merely reporting what I was told. I am under no obligation to correct the error that I have allowed to appear on my blog.

      The problem here is that the Phnom Penh Post published, almost word for word, what APLE had written on its website. This is lazy journalism. However, as I said at the outset, with tight deadlines, this is the sort of mistake that can very easily be made. However, once the mistake had been identified, all efforts should be made to rectify it.

      This is a matter of common decency and your attempts to argue that the Post is under no obligation to correct its error do not reflect well on your own values.

      Here is what Mr Miller wrote in his firstemail to me:

      "I am another victim of APLE and also of the Phnom Penh Post. My case never went to trial and I was completely exonerated by the girls mentioned in the summation .

      For the last three and a half years my name has appeared on google.

      I am falsely described as have been charged with rape and assault - picked up from the Phnom Penh Post. The Phnom Penh Post report is almost word for word the same lies posted on APLE’s website:

      “BRITISH NATIONAL CHARGED WITH RAPE, ASSAULT. Siem Reap Provincial Court has charged a British national with sexually assaulting three female domestic workers in Siem Reap town. Sun Bunthorng, head of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking and Juvenile Protection office, said William Mathieson Miller, 69, an English teacher, was arrested and charged yesterday with rape, attempted rape and sexual assault.”

      Here is the link to Sen David’s article:

      http://www.phnompenhpost.com/national/british-national-charged-rape-assault

      I have asked the Phnom Penh Post to retract the false allegations made in the newspaper. It refuses to do so."

      Unless you have something new to add, I will not bother responding to comments that are just a repeat of what you have already written. We get it. In your world the Post is under no obligation to correct errors. If such errors destroy a man's life, tough shit!

      Delete
    10. The fact that 3 years later the Post has not published the retraction or apology, or even a follow-up, and apparently has no intention of doing so, and that your tactics have them considering legal action against you, while Liam is not capable of legal action against them, should give you some hint that it is not 'my world' but the real world. And that if you really want to help Liam instead of just digging a deeper hole for him, you would be advised to start dealing in this world.

      Another thought: Have you considered the possibility that the statement by Anti-Human Traffic police reported in the Post was not factually inaccurate? That at the time the statement was made it was true and accurate? Assuming Liam's claim is true that he was eventually charged with 'sexual harassment' and later "exonerated" of those charges, that in itself does not necessarily mean that at some point in the process he was not also charged with rape as stated by the Anti-Human Traffic police, only to have those charges later reduced/dropped/changed. It may have even been done without his knowledge. Or he may be lying to you about it. Do you have some official document that states he was never charged with rape? Have you investigated it with the court/police? Have you spoken to Sun Bunthorng of the provincial Anti-Human Trafficking office about it? Or are you just assuming that because he was eventually charged with sexual harassment that he was never charged with rape? Maybe the two statements - Liam's that he was charged with sexual harassment and Bunthorng's that he was charged with rape - are both true.

      Delete
    11. Sorry, forgot this ending paragraph:

      If I was the editor of the Post, I think that possibility would need to be investigated before declaring in print that what the office of Anti-Human Trafficking told them (ie that "was arrested and charged yesterday with rape, attempted rape and sexual assault" was untrue.

      Delete
  25. ...continuing...

    Regardless of whether or not the Post’s ‘rape story’ is defamatory, journalistic integrity and empathy for the damage done to Liam Miller’s professional and personal life should be sufficient for you, as editor, to print a retraction and publish a public apology.

    Let me put this another way. How would you feel, Chad, if an article appeared in a newspaper anywhere in the world, available through google search, in which it was stated that you had been charged with rape? You are no longer able to get a job working as a journalist (does any newspaper wish to employ a journalist charged with rape?) You have court documents to prove that the story is untrue. You write to the editor of the newspaper that published the article, supplying him with the relevant court documents. They contain clear evidence of the article’s factual inaccuracy. The editor does not respond to your correspondence in any way. He ignores you, as you have Mr Miller. You approach google and ask for the factually incorrect article to be removed. Google refuses to do so, informing you that it is up to the newspaper that published the article to remove it. The newspaper refuses to do so. You are not just unemployable; members of your family, believing the story must be true, won’t speak to you anymore. You have become personal non grata. Your life has become an ongoing nightmare.

    Imagine this happening to you, Chad, and perhaps you will appreciate Liam Miller’s predicament – a predicament that you are in a position to alleviate through a public acknowledgement that the Post article was inaccurate. I believe that you have a professional obligation to do so; that both your professional and personal integrity demand that you retract the story, apologize to Liam Miller and make the article unavailable to be found through a google search.

    If you do not, it will be difficult to avoid concluding that the Post has a policy of never admitting to making errors or getting its facts wrong. This is a worrying conclusion to arrive at given how reliant readers of the Post are on the presumption that stories published by it are accurate!

    I have included, below, my own attempts to communicate with you about factually incorrect Post articles. That you don’t bother to respond in any way certainly suggests that accuracy in reporting is not a top priority for the Phnom Penh Post under your stewardship as editor.

    best wishes

    ReplyDelete
  26. When you run out of words call the Lawyers. What now ? Will we see a defamation charge against James Ricketson and the bloggers that dared to ask questions ? I have expected this kind of action for a long time. The silence was just too defening. Will Chad Williams try to form an Alliance of the willing (i.e. APLE, Licadho etc) to join in such a court case before it takes place ? And if indeed Chad Williams sues James Ricketson in court will this happen in Cambodia or Australia ? or is it simply a veiled threat ? Again so many questions !

    ReplyDelete
  27. A bit of background info on chad williams:

    Hollywood reporter ?? Is he perhaps an old buddy of Neeson ?

    Cambodia Daily Editor ? why did he leave ?

    Who founded and finances the PPP from beginning to today ?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous Oct 6 3.45 AM ..
    If you or anyone else on this Blog are serious about getting the facts finding out who is right or who right or is wrong Including APLE or the PPP there is a very simple way I challenge you or anyone else who is prepared to put there name here to do so !
    Contact the Investigating Judge HOK Pov Siem Riep Court and Son Bunthroung of the Human trafficking and child protection unit .
    You will not because you do not want to know the truth !

    You just want to go on your cowardly way attacking me with innuendo, supposition and hypothetical theories .
    Chad Williams or someone using his name said I was "convicted " and the stories were published when asked for details no reply ?

    I visited the office of the PPP as soon as got my documents saying the charges were dropped spoke to Alsn Parkhouse the then Editor asked for a retraction , offered to give him the Court Documents he refused to accept , he said their article was a "translation error" Cambodian Journalist ,, and that he would not do a retraction but would do a story he lied there never was a story.

    On the 15th of December 2014 my court document was delivered to Chad William Editor of the PPP office at Post Media Co , 888 building F Phnom Penh Centre Cnr Sothearos and Sihanouk Blvd Chamkar Mon Cambodia ,by DHL accepted and signed for by Ms PANHA shipment number 2782815346.

    Your writing would not fare well as student essay (academic writing ) you do not provide any concrete support for your statements , specifics needed and facts that can be supported not generalizations and innuendo and supposition
    without facts .,
    .Regarding the statement it is not incumbent on you to provide facts or support when you are defaming me and accusing me of sex crimes , In all western Democracies one is innocent until proven guilty .
    You seem to have taken it on yourself to be a de facto prosecutor so please provide the proof that I am guilty ! this is not a High School debating forum we who are all involved in this discussion are talking about an alleged crime a mans life and reputation .
    Liam Miller

    ReplyDelete
  29. "I visited the office of the PPP as soon as got my documents saying the charges were dropped spoke to Alsn Parkhouse the then Editor asked for a retraction , offered to give him the Court Documents he refused to accept , he said their article was a "translation error" Cambodian Journalist ,, and that he would not do a retraction but would do a story he lied there never was a story."

    Interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous 12.45 .. read as Alan Parkhouse typo errpr

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem. I read it as such. Very interesting that (assuming your story is true) the PPP acknowledged that there was an error to you in private, but did nothing to correct it publicly. If what you say is true, then there is no argument that they accurately reported a statement by the Anti-Human Trafficking department that happened to be factually inaccurate. It means that they made an error, they are aware of the error and acknowledge it, and they have made a conscious decision to leave that error online without correction or addendum. Very odd indeed. I wonder what their motivation could be for doing that.

      Delete
  31. The day that I visited the PPP office in Jully 2011 I spoke to some staff who were taking a break ( maybe smoking I can not remember) in the lobby/stairs ,they all heard me say I wanted to see the editor as I was going to sue for defamation . ( in hindsight not a smart move )
    After talking to Alan Parkhouse he sent me into a room with a Canadian Journalist to do the story he had said he would run instead of a retraction ..
    I am sure several of the journalist would have been aware of that too !

    If any them are still working there they could verify this ,
    if they would be prepared to is another matter .
    Perhaps an ex employee would ?
    If we could contact them ?

    ReplyDelete