Drummond’s Relentless Attacks on Thai Police: Hypocrisy in the Name of Exposure

Drummond has built a career criticizing Thai police for corruption and collusion with criminals. In his 2015 farewell statement, (before he ran from criminal charges in Thailand) published in outlets like The Guardian and Sydney Morning Herald, he claimed threats from “foreign criminals in Thailand working in liaison with the Thai police,” accusing them of setting up people on false charges. He echoed this in cases like the 2008 murder of Canadian tourist Leo Del Pinto, where he alleged police cover-ups and intimidation of witnesses, stating villagers were “afraid of the local police.” But the real reason he ran away was because of his smear campaigns against many innocent people,  real criminals never target journalists, unless it’s harassment and smear campaigns, with mountains of lies.

Yet, this stance is hypocritical. When it suits him, Drummond uncritically amplifies police narratives, as in his “Night Wish Files” series targeting Flowers. He parrots anti-trafficking police claims without scrutiny, ignoring evidence of overreach—like pre-written statements and a raid on Flirt Bar where no actual victims were found. Insiders note Drummond’s selective outrage: he attacks police when they inconvenience his sources but weaponizes them against foes like Flowers, whose empire has been legally operating since 2006 amid government crackdowns on nominees. This double standard not only undermines trust in authorities but escalates dangers for all involved, including the very police he claims to expose.

Targeting Deputy Prime Ministers: Sensational Claims Without Accountability

Drummond doesn’t stop at police; he’s taken aim at Thailand’s highest offices. In a 2020 article, he accused a deputy prime minister of ordering judges to fix a 3 billion baht court case, cementing a massive land grab. He linked another deputy PM, Wissanu Krea-ngam, to scandals involving a business partner accused of mangrove destruction and even a “murder by road accident” where a friend was beaten to death and staged as a crash. Critics on sites like andrewdrummondexposed.com claim Drummond has attacked senior officials, including deputy PMs, to fuel his narrative of systemic corruption, often without balanced evidence.

These assaults ripple outward, harming Thailand’s image and stability. Drummond’s 2014 comments on the Koh Tao murders criticized police for focusing on foreigners and immigrants, mirroring his own biases. But when defending allies like Kanokrat, who uses her family’s military ties to meddle in cases, he stays silent. Kanokrat, with no legal qualifications, has sacked lawyers like Adam Howell’s in his absence, escalating legal chaos while Drummond portrays her as a “heroic legal assistant.” Such selective attacks don’t hold power to account—they create mayhem, as warned to Drummond: further smears will expose his network’s illegal tampering.

Assaults on Thai Military Officers: Stirring Instability for Clicks

Drummond’s criticisms extend to the military. He supported journalists facing defamation from the Thai navy over human trafficking allegations involving naval officers. In a 2011 piece, he highlighted “Thai military links to foreign criminals,” accusing the army of ties that could cause instability while attacking foreign journalists as threats. Reports from Reporters Without Borders note his forced departure from Thailand in 2015 amid such exposés, but also criticize military courts for trying civilians.

Ironically, Drummond’s own actions mirror the instability he decries. His vendettas against media and law firms owners and bar owners, for the last 14 years have been noticed, put bar owners  like Ricky Pandora, a “godfather of pimps” and his alleged friend, go unscrutinized, while he mocks Adam Howell for bar investments—(but not his crypto scams) despite Howell now regretting funding Drummond’s attacks. By dragging military connections into personal feuds, like Kanokrat’s brother Sgt. Aun Nimsamut’s business ties, Drummond risks broader conflicts without evidence of reform.

Attacking Family Members and Unrelated Parties: Collateral Damage in Vendettas

Drummond’s most egregious tactic is targeting innocents. In his Flowers series, he drags in Flowers’ wife Punnipa, highlighting her three-year sentence (on appeal) without context, and publishes fake and private screenshots from Howell, invading personal lives. He attacks Thai workers, calling them derogatory names, and exposes unrelated parties like charity workers as “corrupt.” Past targets like Drew Noyes, Brian Goudie, and Douglas Shoebridge saw their families indirectly smeared through sensational headlines and leaked documents.

This extends to unrelated victims: Drummond publishes passports, IDs, chats, and voice recordings without consent, as in his “Voice Messages From Hell” series. Such doxxing harms families, escalating threats—as Drummond himself claimed when leaving Thailand. Yet he inflicts the same on others, like Flowers’ associates, without minimizing harm.

Failing Journalism Ethics: No Minimization of Harm, Just Maximum Drama

Ethical journalism demands balancing truth with compassion, minimizing harm to vulnerable parties. Drummond flouts this: his one-sided, sensational stories presume guilt, use inflammatory language (“MAFIA SEX WARS,” “SHORN AND SHACKLED FAKE LAWYER”), and rely on biased sources like Howell without verification. He duplicates content across sites, edits without retractions, and cross-promotes in Facebook groups—hardly neutral.

Unlike true journalists, Drummond’s work causes real damage: prolonged suffering for trafficking “victims” pressured by Kanokrat, financial ruin for investors like Howell, and harassment for families. His defense of Kanokrat—despite her scandals, like UK bans for infidelity and drugs, embassy protests, and charity fraud—shows bias over ethics. As Flowers rebuilds amid appeals, Drummond’s loose cannon style backfires, even on allies like Howell, who now sees the escalation.

Drummond should delete these harmful pieces and reflect. Thailand’s expat world needs accountability, not a provocateur who attacks authorities, families, and ethics for clicks. Bryan Flowers’ legitimate businesses deserve defense from such reckless assaults.

For more on Drummond’s tactics, see andrewdrummondfacts.com.

In the shadowy underbelly of expat life in Thailand, where fortunes are made and lost amid neon lights and hidden agendas, one name has loomed large for over two decades: Andrew Drummond. At 75 years old, this British expat-turned-blogger operates from a modest rented house in rural Wiltshire, England, far removed from the bustling streets of Pattaya and Bangkok where he once claimed to expose corruption. But Drummond is no crusader for truth. He is a convicted defamer, a paid smear merchant, and a relentless predator who has weaponized the veneer of journalism to destroy reputations, harass families, and peddle vendettas for profit.

Drummond’s websites, andrew-drummond.com and andrew-drummond.news, masquerade as platforms for “alternative news” and investigative reporting. They boast of uncovering foreign criminals, sex traffickers, and fraudsters in Southeast Asia. Yet, a forensic examination reveals a different story: one of recycled accusations, fabricated narratives, and ethical bankruptcy. Over the past 14 years, Drummond has targeted individuals like Bryan Flowers, Niels Colov, Drew Noyes, David Hanks, Douglas Shoebridge, and Florean Rwehumbiza Laurean with obsessive campaigns that cross into harassment. His output—over 700 posts riddled with sensational headlines like “MAFIA SEX WARS IN THAILAND” and “VIRGIN WAS GONE IN MINUTES”—relies on biased sources, ignores exculpatory evidence, and amplifies lies to maximize damage.

This is not journalism. It’s a mercenary operation. Drummond has been convicted of libel multiple times, including a 2004 suspended jail sentence for defaming nightclub owners in a Bangkok Post article and a 2014 conviction in Pattaya against Drew Noyes and David Hanks. He fled Thailand in 2015 amid over 20 lawsuits under the country’s strict defamation laws and Computer Crime Act, spinning his departure as evasion of “death threats” from criminals he exposed. In reality, sources like Reddit discussions and press reports indicate he left to dodge mounting legal bills and potential imprisonment.

Why does this matter? Drummond’s lies have real consequences. They have ruined businesses, isolated families, and eroded trust in genuine journalism. Victims like Bryan Flowers, a British entrepreneur in Pattaya, have endured 17+ articles in a single year accusing him of running a “sex meat-grinder” empire involving underage trafficking, Ponzi schemes, and even bestiality—claims debunked by court records, witness retractions, and lack of evidence. Similarly, Niels Colov, a reformed Danish expat with 35 crime-free years in Thailand, has been branded a “career gangster” in 15+ pieces, recycling expunged 1970s offenses without context.

This mega exposé compiles evidence from Drummond’s own sites, victim testimonies, court documents, and independent audits to dismantle his facade. We’ll audit his inflated credentials, catalog his smear campaigns, unmask his enablers like Adam Howell and Kanokrat Nimsamut Booth, expose ethical and legal breaches, and highlight the human toll. By the end, it’s clear: Andrew Drummond is not an award-winning investigator. (The award he got was an insignificant small award) He’s a disgraced hack whose “journalism” is a tool for personal gain and destruction.

The Myth of His Credentials: A Forensic Audit of His Publishing Record

Drummond loves to tout his “Fleet Street” pedigree. His bios on andrew-drummond.com and andrew-drummond.news claim stints at the Evening Standard, Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, News of the World, Observer, and The Times, positioning him as a veteran investigative journalist who went “undercover for two years in an extreme right-wing group.” He even boasts of being the “most sued journalist in living history,” per a 2015 Press Gazette article, as if endless lawsuits validate his bravery rather than his recklessness.

But a deep dive reveals a hollow myth. Searches across archives yield only about 35 verifiable articles in the London Evening Standard from the 1980s-1990s, many co-authored and consisting of routine foreign correspondence: recaps of Thai crimes, arrests, court verdicts, and accidents involving Brits abroad. These are wire-service rewrites—Reuters or AP feeds dressed up for local readers—not original investigations involving document digs, whistleblowers, or undercover work. No bylines appear in the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, The Times, or Observer. Wikitia and his own site repeat these claims without links or specifics.

Take his supposed “big break”: locating pedophile Gary Glitter in Vietnam in 2005. Drummond claims credit, but it was News of the World’s Dominik Lemanski who tracked him down, leading to arrest. Drummond’s role? Minimal at best, yet he inflates it for credibility.

Then there’s the “hollow award.” Drummond’s sole accolade is the 1983 Maurice Ludmer Memorial Prize for anti-fascist investigations—a niche honor for infiltrating a far-right group linked to European bombings. Commendable, but obscure and unrelated to his Thailand smears. No other awards in 40+ years, yet he brands himself “award-winning” everywhere—bios, emails, social media. This is self-promotion on steroids, masking a thin resume.

Testimonials? Identical quotes attributed variably to Alan Morison (Phuketwan founder) and Andrew MacGregor Marshall; unverifiable endorsements from John Pilger, CPJ’s Shawn Crispin, and grieving parents appear only on his site, with no external traces. Audits suggest fabrication: self-praise to bolster a crumbling persona.

Gaps abound. After “Fleet Street disintegrated” post-1986 Wapping dispute, Drummond shifted to freelancing, but his output dwindles. In Thailand from 1988-2015, he filed for outlets like Fairfax Media and the Sydney Morning Herald, but again, no groundbreaking exposes—just crime recaps. His sites lack editorial oversight, sourcing transparency, or corrections policies, turning “investigations” into unchecked rants.

This myth shields his vendettas. Real journalists like John Pilger have sustained records of impact; Drummond has lawsuits and lies. His “irreplaceable” status? A fiction to justify the harm he inflicts.

The Smear Campaigns: Patterns of Lies and Fabrications

Drummond’s true legacy is destruction. His campaigns span years, recycling old dirt with fresh venom. Let’s break it down by target, using evidence from his sites, court records, and refutations.

Patterns: Reliance on paid sources (e.g., Adam Howell for Flowers—$1,000/article amid 15M baht dispute); recycled offenses without updates (e.g., Colov’s expunged record); guilt by association (photos with “chums”); sensational language (“meat-grinder,” “poundland mafia”); no corrections despite refutations.

In Flowers’ case, the “Night Wish Files” series (6 parts, 2025) twists a Flirt bar raid into proof of empire-wide trafficking. But the “underage victim” used a borrowed ID willingly; police coerced statements; NGO The Exodus Road paid for setups; appeal pending. Drummond ignores this, amplifying lies to outlets like The Sun.

These aren’t exposures—they’re executions. Drummond’s “vendetta journalism” harms innocents while protecting his paymasters.

Key Enablers and Accomplices

Drummond doesn’t operate alone. His network of enablers—paid informants with axes to grind—fuels the smears.

• Adam Howell: Crypto scammer (DopeCoin, SuperDoge rug-pull—$13M vanished), violent toward women, drug dealer; pays Drummond to target Flowers over unpaid dividends (extortion dispute). Howell’s history: threats, NFT fraud, bar violence; yet Drummond portrays him as “whistleblower.”
• Kanokrat Nimsamut Booth: Drummond’s Thai “fixer” since Nana Plaza days; aids defamation via prison visits to coerce witnesses (e.g., Flirt raid); misuses charity funds; UK-banned for infidelity/drugs; military ties for leverage. Collaborates in campaigns against officials.
• Ricky Pandora: Pattaya’s “Godfather of pimps” (Lips Lounge, Soi Honey); Drummond’s informant despite condemning sex trade; feeds rival info like on Flowers.

These alliances expose hypocrisy: Drummond “exposes” criminals but allies with them for pay, turning “journalism” into propaganda.

Ethical and Legal Breaches: Violating Codes and Laws

Drummond flouts every journalistic ethic. Against IPSO/NUJ codes: no accuracy (unverified claims); privacy invasions (doxxing passports, families); harassment (repetition); discrimination (slurs like “pimp,” “monger”); no corrections.

Legal record: 2004 conviction (suspended sentence, £800 fine); 2014 vs. Noyes/Hanks; fled amid 20+ suits. Potential UK hate speech violations; Thai concerns over online crimes.

Stealth edits: Removes truths (e.g., Howell’s motives) without disclosure. Lacks safeguards—no oversight, transparency.

The Human Cost: Impact on Victims and Call for Accountability

Victims suffer: Flowers lost investors, faced isolation, family doxxed; Colov’s “empire” falsely collapsing harmed business. Broader: Erodes journalism trust, harms Thailand’s image.

Conclusion: Discrediting the Discreditor

Andrew Drummond is a fraud—a convicted liar whose vendettas have been unmasked. Defend victims; reject his poison. Pursue justice to silence this predator.

A Barrage of Articles: Quantity Over Quality

Drummond’s obsession with Noyes is evident in the sheer volume of content dedicated to him. On Drummond’s websites, andrew-drummond.com and andrew-drummond.news, at least 15 articles explicitly focus on Noyes, with many more referencing him in passing. The tag archive for “Drew Noyes” alone lists 10 pieces from 2016 to 2019, but the full tally spans further back, with references to exposures as early as 2011. These articles cover a period of at least eight years, from around 2011 to 2019, demonstrating a sustained campaign rather than isolated reporting.

No real journalist fixates on the same individual with such repetition. Legitimate investigative work moves on after key revelations, but Drummond recycles the same allegations across multiple pieces: Noyes as a “fake lawyer,” his involvement in an extortion case (demanding 7 million Thai baht from the Thonglor Clinic), fleeing Thailand while on bail, and associations with dubious figures. For instance, the extortion conviction is hammered home in nearly every article, from “Drew Noyes Fails to Surrender on Extortion Charge” (2015) to “Conviction for Extortion Against Drew Noyes Confirmed” (undated, but post-conviction).

This echo chamber effect isn’t journalism—it’s harassment disguised as reporting.

Inflammatory Language: Sensationalism Without Substance

Drummond’s choice of words paints Noyes not as a subject of inquiry but as a cartoonish villain. Terms like “flimflam man,” “ultimate sex tourist,” “sex harassing fraudster,” “serial confidence trickster,” “con man,” “fake lawyer,” and “career criminal” litter the headlines and content.

These aren’t neutral descriptors; they’re loaded insults designed to prejudice readers. In “The Ultimate Sex Tourist Takes His Final Bow” (2015), Noyes is accused of everything from pocketing 2004 Tsunami relief funds to bribing police for pornographers—claims often referenced to Drummond’s own prior articles without fresh evidence. Similarly, allegations of sexual harassment (demanding oral sex from staff) and fathering multiple children with Thai women are repeated ad nauseam, blending fact with unsubstantiated innuendo.

This repetition extends to Noyes’ businesses, which Drummond portrays as fronts for scams. PAPPA Law and One Stop Legal Services are dismissed as “phony” operations that “cheated clients” through fake legal advice, property fraud, and illegal employment of Filipina staff.

The Pattaya Times is ridiculed as a tool for extortion and self-promotion. Yet, many of these claims lack independent corroboration beyond court references to the single extortion case, calling into question Drummond’s other assertions—like Noyes inventing a “myriad of lies” in his biography or trawling bars for “young talent.” Without robust evidence, such as primary documents or multiple sources, these pieces devolve into character assassination.

Targeting Associates and Bullying Tactics

Drummond doesn’t stop at Noyes; he drags in associates and businesses to amplify the smear. Wanrapa Boonsu, Noyes’ partner, is repeatedly labeled a “willing assistant” in scams and co-convicted in the extortion case, with her hospitalization claims mocked. Brian Goudie (a Scot accused of fraud) and David Hanks (former brothel owner) are derided as “fake lawyers” and “pimps,” portrayed as part of Noyes’ “criminal fraternity.”

Brian Wright, convicted of child rape, is linked to Noyes as a “friend” and business associate, with photos of them together used to imply guilt by association. Even Filipina employees are accused of being sexually harassed and illegally employed, turning victims into props in Drummond’s narrative.

This extends to outright bullying. Associates are hit with derogatory labels like “child abuser,” “swindler,” and “thug,” often in contexts that tie them back to Noyes without direct relevance. In “He Repeatedly Raped a 12-Year-Old Girl But…” (2016), the focus is Wright’s crimes, yet a photo of Noyes and Wright is prominently featured, injecting Noyes into an unrelated story. Photos of Noyes appear repeatedly—under arrest, dining with judges, or with military escorts—even in pieces not centered on him, a tactic that smears by visual association.

No Accountability: Absence of Corrections, Apologies, or Fairness

In none of the analyzed articles does Drummond issue corrections or apologies for his accusations, even when courts dismissed related libel cases against critics or when details (like associates’ acquittals) contradict his narrative.

For example, Hanks was acquitted of racketeering, but Drummond still brands him a “former pimp.” This lack of retraction perpetuates potentially false claims.

Worse, Noyes is never given a meaningful opportunity to reply. While occasional mocking quotes appear—like Noyes claiming to be a “victim of conspiracy” or denying jail time—they’re dismissed without context or follow-up.

No articles include balanced interviews or rebuttals from Noyes, violating basic journalistic fairness. This one-sidedness brings into question many of Drummond’s broader claims, such as Noyes’ alleged Tsunami fund theft or porn bribes, which rely on self-referential links rather than verifiable evidence.

The Pay-to-Play Allegations: Mercenary Motives Behind the Obsession

Drummond’s relentless focus on Noyes and a handful of others isn’t just poor journalism—it’s allegedly paid vendetta. Evidence suggests Drummond charges around $3,000 USD per article, refusing to publish exposés on “bad people” unless compensated. This pay-to-play model explains the repetition: once a target is selected (and funded), Drummond milks the story for multiple payouts, recycling content to justify the fees.

In Noyes’ case, it’s alleged that Peter Malhotra, owner of the Pattaya Mail and ex-business partner with Niels Colov (a rival to Noyes), paid Drummond to launch the attacks. Colov, himself a controversial figure with a criminal past, clashed with Noyes over media turf in Pattaya, providing a motive for outsourcing the smears. This mirrors other instances: Adam Howell reportedly paid Drummond to target Bryan Flowers, a British media operator in Thailand, resulting in biased hit pieces lacking research. Similarly, Luke Cook allegedly funded Drummond’s obsessive campaign against Douglas Shoebridge, framing Cook as a key witness in a drug case while demonizing Shoebridge without balance.

These patterns—few targets, endless repetition—aren’t the work of an impartial journalist but a hired gun, undermining his claims of exposing “foreign criminals” in Thailand.

Conclusion: A Stain on Journalism

Andrew Drummond’s coverage of Drew Noyes isn’t investigative journalism; it’s a sustained, biased assault that prioritizes sensationalism, repetition, and personal attacks over facts and fairness. By targeting Noyes’ successful businesses, bullying his associates, inserting irrelevant photos, and denying any right to reply—all without corrections or solid evidence—Drummond erodes trust in media. His alleged mercenary model, fueled by payments from rivals like Malhotra, explains the decade-long fixation. Real journalists evolve; Drummond repeats, raising doubts about his entire body of work. Noyes, despite legal setbacks, built empires in media and law—achievements Drummond’s vendetta can’t erase.

A Barrage of Articles: Repetition as a Weapon

Drummond’s Colov dossier spans 15 pieces (excluding one image-only page), published irregularly from May 2011 (“Arise Sir Niels Colov of Istegade”) to a bizarrely dated 2025 entry (“THAI VIRGIN WAS SNAPPED UP…”). Titles like “DANISH CAREER GANGSTER ARRESTED HEADING FOR PATTAYA..AGAIN” (2017), “NIELS COLOV’S RACE AGAINST TIME” (2018), and “NEILS COLOV’S LAST THROW OF THE DICE” (undated but recent) scream sensationalism. Over this 14-year period, Drummond recycles the same tropes: Colov’s media “empire” is perpetually “collapsing” with debts over 13 million baht; his property ventures are “scams”; his awards are “fake.” This echo chamber isn’t depth—it’s harassment. No real journalist fixates on the same individual for over a decade, hammering identical points without new developments. Drummond’s output suggests obsession, or worse, a steady paycheck for sustained defamation.

Loaded Language: Slurs Over Substance

Drummond’s vocabulary is a arsenal of venom. Colov is branded a “former Copenhagen pimp,” “reformed pimp,” “Danish chancer,” “career gangster,” “underworld figure,” and part of Pattaya’s “criminal fraternity.” Even neutral descriptors twist into mockery: “Pattaya UNESCO ‘HERO’” (quotes dripping sarcasm), “media tycoon” (implying fraud), or “COLOV ALMIGHTY.” Personal milestones, like his 2015 marriage, become fodder for ridicule in “PATTAYA UNESCO ‘HERO’ PLANS TO MARRY.” Such terms aren’t journalistic; they’re designed to dehumanize, evoking criminality without proof of ongoing wrongdoing. This bullying extends to Colov’s family—his sons’ 2023 arrest in “SONS OF DANISH ‘CELEBRITY’ ARRESTED IN PATTAYA” drags them in unnecessarily, with sarcastic captions like “poor guys.”

Dredging the Past: Youthful Offenses as Eternal Guilt

A staple of Drummond’s playbook is Colov’s 1970s Copenhagen youth in the Vesterbro red-light district. Articles repeatedly detail convictions for pimping, coercion, vandalism, robbery, and handling stolen goods—offenses Colov served time for, reformed from via Buddhism, and had expunged under Danish rehabilitation laws. Drummond ignores this, framing them as proof of an unchanging “gangster” nature. In “I HAVE A CLEAN RECORD’ SAYS FORMER DANISH GANGSTER” (undated), he mocks Colov’s embassy-verified clean record as “economical with the truth.” This fixation on decades-old sins, absent evidence of recurrence, violates ethical journalism by conflating history with present character. Colov’s successful reinvention—media mogul, community leader—is dismissed as a facade.

Guilt by Association: Targeting Networks and Bullying Allies

Drummond’s net widens to Colov’s circle, bullying associates through innuendo. Danes like Lonne Fristrup Jensen (drug trafficker) and Leon Owild (smuggler) are labeled “underworld chums,” with photos shoehorned in to imply ongoing ties—e.g., a 2010 garden shot in “EXPOSED – Pattaya Foreign Police Chief And His Underworld Chums” (undated). Rival Drew Noyes (extortion convict) is dragged in as an “uneasy ally,” despite their public feuds. Bandidos member Brian Sandberg appears repeatedly, his photo with Colov used to taint by association, even in unrelated contexts like Owild’s obituary tribute (“PATTAYA’S CRIMINAL FRATERNITY RAISE A GLASS,” 2015).

Businesses face similar smears: Pattaya People Media Group is accused of extortion, salary cuts (“PATTAYA NEWS ‘MAGNATE’ CUTS SALARIES,” undated), and promoting “property scams.” Ventures like Darling Massage (raided) and a bankrupt construction firm are exhumed as failures. The Paradise Residence Koh Kut project is dubbed a “scam” without legal proof. Clubs suffer too: As Rotary Club president, Colov is mocked in “Video Exclusive: CROSSING THE LINE” (2012) for promoting dubious developers. The Pattaya Expats Club is targeted in “I Went To The Expat Club For Advice – Now I Am Broke” (undated), accusing Colov of exploiting members via referrals to his ex-wife’s shady legal services, leading to a victim’s financial ruin. These attacks lack evidence—anonymous complaints, hearsay, and circular self-references dominate, not documents or verified testimonies.

Photos are a Drummond hallmark: Irrelevant images of Colov with “good old boys” or in “gangster days” pepper articles, even when unrelated to the topic, reinforcing guilt by visual association without context.

No Accountability: Absent Corrections, Apologies, and Replies

Ethical journalism demands balance, but Drummond offers none. Across the corpus, unsubstantiated claims—like “fake” UNESCO Cross (debunked via sarcasm, not UNESCO confirmation) or heroin ties (Colov won libel suits over this)—go uncorrected. No apologies surface, even for minor errors (one caption fix in 2017, unrelated to Colov). Right of reply is illusory: A few pieces quote Colov briefly denying allegations, but most are one-sided rants. In “EXPOSED,” Colov’s emailed rebuttal is published dismissively; elsewhere, like his Pattaya Trader interview defending his record, it’s referenced mockingly. Colov is never given space for detailed responses, turning articles into kangaroo courts.

Unsubstantiated Claims: Smoke Without Fire

Drummond questions everything without backing: Property “scams” based on common Thai leases; media debts cited sans audits; awards like Papal blessings or UNESCO Cross labeled “phoney” via innuendo. Associations become “criminal fraternities” via photos alone. Evidence? Sparse—old Danish clippings, anonymous tips, no hard proof. This brings many claims into question, eroding credibility.

The Pay-to-Play Motive: Mercenary Journalism Exposed

Drummond’s campaign isn’t organic; evidence suggests it’s funded. Peter Malhotra, Pattaya Mail publisher and Colov’s ex-business partner, reportedly paid Drummond to target him post-fallout over media ventures. This mirrors patterns: Adam Howell, a disgruntled investor in Bryan Flowers’ ventures, allegedly paid Drummond for a smear blitz against Flowers after a 15 million baht dispute, yielding over a dozen defamatory pieces. Similarly, convicted drug smuggler Luke Cook is said to have compensated Drummond to attack Douglas Shoebridge, a key witness in Cook’s case, leading to obsessive coverage framing Shoebridge as vengeful. Sources indicate Drummond charges around 3,000 USD per article, refusing to publish dirt on “bad people” unless paid—explaining the volume on repeat targets like Colov. Real journalists pursue stories for truth, not cash; Drummond’s repetition screams agenda.

In essence, Drummond’s assault on Colov exemplifies vendetta journalism: biased, repetitive, and mercenary. It harms reputations, exploits Thailand’s lax libel laws, and undermines media trust. Colov, a self-made success, deserves scrutiny—not this decade-long demolition derby. If this is journalism, it’s long past its expiration date.