On 4 September 2008, I received an email from an acquaintance of Harry Nicolaides, a Thailand based, Melbourne journalist and sometime contributor to Eureka Street. Her tone was anxious. Harry had been arrested in Bangkok.
'He is not a criminal,' she insisted. 'He wants you to publish his story ... He is in a bad condition, physically and mentally. Please help.'
We acted immediately. Clearing the next day's edition, we contacted Canberra academics Nicholas Farrelly and Andrew Walker, experts in Thai politics and critics of the law (lèse majesté, regarding insulting Thai royals) under which Harry had been arrested. Within a few hours they produced a terrific article that looked at the particulars of Harry's case and offered a critique of the lèse majesté law.
'In Thailand, it is even hard to report the details of a lèse majesté charge without fear of sanction,' they wrote. 'Hopefully foreign journalists will exercise their greater freedom to report on his predicament.'
That's what we intended to do. We prepared their article for publication first thing the following day. We hoped that, in our own way, we would be helping to spread good will regarding Harry and his predicament.
It wasn't to be. At 6.32 p.m. I received a second note from our correspondent: 'Please do not publish the article. If we say anything that offends the Thai government, it will not help Harry.' The sentiment was reinforced by a phone call from a relative of Harry's.
We hit the brakes. With only a mouse-click remaining to complete the process of publishing the article, we decided to abide by the request. We withdrew the article, a decision received graciously by Nich and Andrew, who later revised and published it on their blog.
Harry's story, which received much media attention in Australia, is now well known. He was sentenced, jailed, and recently pardoned. He has now returned to Australia.
All of which has what to do with this week's film review? Well, not a lot. Except that both Harry's story, and the film The Reader, promote reflection on the nature of guilt.
Few would dispute that Harry was legally guilty. Those who travel are responsible for familiarising themselves with local laws. Harry, it seemed, had flaunted this one. Indeed, 'Harry doesn't want the press to condemn Thai laws,' our correspondent insisted. 'He respects Thai law.'
On the other hand, morally speaking, Harry's guilt seemed 'small'. The charge was laid in response to a