The Schapelle Corby Story

[RhondaLee]

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15443049-2,00.html


SCHAPELLE Corby is suffering cruel abuse and racial taunts in jail as Indonesian authorities move to keep her in prison for life.

Wouldn't it be something for this news to transform into a BDSM enslavement story. Basically, Schapelle Corby smuggled 9 lb of weed into Bali, got caught, and sentenced to 20 years yesterday.

Now, in that prison, the news break that "She says the Indonesians inside are giving her hell because she wears western clothes and she can't speak Indonesian," she said.

[Caitlin]

Wouldn't it be something for this news to transform into a BDSM enslavement story.

Wouldn’t it be something if you wrote your own fantasy BDSM enslavement story. I would much rather read something like that, than some contorted story that was based on a real persons suffering and anguish.

[albear]

I think it might be in bad taste to base a story on Schapelle's case considering she was sentenced two days ago and a lot of people in Australia are extremely pissed off about it. There were a lot of holes in her case including the police failing to fingerprint the bag of marijuana, refusing to test it's origin even after the AFP offered their time and services to test it and throwing all evidence of dodgy baggage handling out even though baggage handlers have now been stood down from duties for tampering with baggage.

If you're talking about the basic storyline: a person being incarcerated/enslaved for something they possibly didn't do.... then okay but not entirely original. It probably wouldn't go down well to mention Corby's name though.

[RhondaLee]

It's a fantasy novel. Just like someone else here wrote a Martha Stewart prison story with a slight change of her name. By your logic, Martha is really innocent (she is only guilty of being stupid), noone should write a story on Martha and yet there is some member here wrote a story on her.

I was surprised that if Corby didn't use the drug or nor never use the weed before, she should strengthen her case by doing a drug test, proving that she never use weed before. But I don't recall the defense use that as evidence.

[albear]

The reason I gave for not writing the story was that it might be in bad taste. I know nothing about Martha Stewart, the circumstances of her case or the story written about it. Nor do I want to.

Just stating my opinion :)

[Caitlin]

I was surprised that if Corby didn't use the drug or nor never use the weed before, she should strengthen her case by doing a drug test, proving that she never use weed before. But I don't recall the defense use that as evidence.

Corby was tested for drugs. She had both a blood test and urine samples taken. She was drug free. It was on a 60 minutes interview.

There is a vast difference in how Martha Stewart served her prison sentence, and how Schapelle will serve hers. For Schapelle to survive she has to be financially supported by her own family. She needs money to buy extra food, bribe prison guards, and have her own cell, instead of sharing with seven other women. Schapelle is also in a foreign country, doesn’t understand the language, and the population have more their own fair share of muslim religious fanatics.

The judiciary system is also vastly different. Stewart was innocent until proven guilty. Schapelle was guilty until she can prove her innocence. Stewart was judge by a jury, Schapelle was judge by Judges who had never given an innocent verdict.

Just because 'someone else' wrote a Martha Stweart prison story, doesn’t mean you have to follow suit. The difference between the Stewart's experiences and Schapelle are vastly different.

As I said, I don't mind a fantasy story, but one based on Schapelle sufferings is quite tasteless. It's not how I like to get my kicks out of life.

[RhondaLee]

Schapelle was guilty until she can prove her innocence. Stewart was judge by a jury, Schapelle was judge by Judges who had never given an innocent verdict.

Since when? Is it really true? You mean in Indonesia, the legal system is guilty until proven innocent. Also, when you said "Judges never given an innocent verdict, you meant all these years in all the hundreds of trials?



As I said, I don't mind a fantasy story, but one based on Schapelle sufferings is quite tasteless. It's not how I like to get my kicks out of life.

that's all right. I don't write story, I don't have the time. I am just saying this could be a story idea.

[Caitlin]

Since when? Is it really true? You mean in Indonesia, the legal system is guilty until proven innocent.
Indonedian Law is not based on English Law. Schapelle has been accused. The onus is on her to prove her innocence. Not the other way around.


Also, when you said "Judges never given an innocent verdict, you meant all these years in all the hundreds of trials?
The Judges presiding over her trial; Yes. For your perusal http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15400604-2,00.html


I don't write story, I don't have the time. I am just saying this could be a story idea.
And I'm just saying its tasteless to base that sort of story based on a real persons suffering and anguish. This is a forum, and I'm stating my opinion.

[Sweep]

You guys must be Aussies - I don't think that many people in the world (including Indonesia) know who she is.

I think that you are both right - Shapelle got a bad deal and the case would have beed dismissed in Oz for lack of evidence or contaminated evidence.

Still - The first thing that I thought of when I saw Shapelle in handcuffs was how sexy she looked. OK I'm a twisted bastard but that's why I'm on thios site.

I'm sorry for her and would do anything I could to help her but there are very few real life stories with such strong bondage implications.

[albear]

Yeah, we are Aussies :) And you're right, until after the verdict and she was on the front page of the Jakarta Post, no one in Indonesia even knew who she was. In Australia it's a whole other story though! It could possibly be very bad for our country's relationship with Indonesia, with a lot of Aussies withdrawing their bits of the $1 billion aide we gave for the tsunami relief, and holidays to Bali being cancelled. During the recent Red Cross doorknock appeal a lot of people were stipulating that they would NOT donate unless it can be guaranteed the money isn't going to Indonesia. It's sad, because the Indonesian people will suffer, when it's not their fault. That said, I won't be travelling there in just for the simple fact that I value my life too much to risk it. I think it's just a really touchy subject at the moment, and too close to home for a lot of Aussies.

[miss duece]

we had this discussion today in class about corby. if this evidence was presented in the US the majority of the student body (with exception of 2 ppl) in this class size of 132 students thinks she will be found guilty based on the fact that the evidence overwhelmingly points the finger at her despite some discrepancies. the fact was, she had weed in her bag and her defense was that she got caught up in some drug smuggling conspiracy back in her homeland. the fact that she got caught outside the her native country and the fact that her defense fail to prove such existence of tampering with her bag is bad luck on her part. ppl get sentenced to death in the US (which claims to have the fairest justice system) without so much as a muder weapon at times (especially here in tx), let alone this woman has a whole bag of weed. its not up to the prosecution in any country to prove someone's innocence. to most outsiders she just got caught red handed and lots of people, especially in the surrounding asian countries don't know what the big deal is. the taiwanese national cable that i get at home even suggested that austrialians were making a big deal out of this because she's white while austrialia has some 80 something other citizens in jail in other asian countries on similiar charges but most of them were asian. i don't know if she's innocent or not but if she's really guilty i think it was a pretty tough sentence considering the conditions. then again 9 lbs will get you about the same sentence here if not more, but the conditions here are waaaay better.


another question that came up during the class discussion was the role of the austrailian govt. why were there no formal investigations into her defense claims of baggage handlers and corruption? instead the govt downplayed the situation of security risks at airports and ask ppl not to panic. well, to alot of the students it seemed that not going to one place because they might prosecute you seems pretty dumb if the problem was at the airports in the country itself, it wouldn't matter where you go, you'll still get into trouble if you got framed even though the punishment might not be as harsh. it seems that most austrailians blame the indonesians for their legal systems 'failure' and fail to look at the supposed orginal source of the problem. its pretty hard for the rest of the world to feel anything more than pity.

[albear]

I'm not claiming to be an expert on the Corby case, or on law of any kind, all I know is what I've heard through the media (which is probably skewed and bias - but that's a whole other conversation!)

The Australian government offered the services of the AFP to test the point of origin of the dope. That way they could tell if it came from Sydney, Brisbane or Bali. This offer was rejected by the judges. Corby's defense team tried to secure video footage of Brisbane airport, the airport was not forthcoming or helpful. The government is now telling people not to panic because of incidents like the one today: an unmarked envelope was delivered to the Indonesian embassy in the ACT containing some kind of biological matter. It's not identified yet, so all the embassy staff are in isolation and are quarantined until it has been declared not hazardous. Now that the trial is over, the governement have offered the serfvices of two QCs for the appeal. They are also drafting a prisoner transfer agreement to bring Schappelle to Brisbane to serve her sentence. Too little too late maybe, but realistically the government have no influence over the Indonesian court system, so there isn't a lot else they could do. Corby's legal defense was being funded by a local businessman who owns a chain of mobile phone stores, so they didn't need to help with that either.

Something else that has been discussed quite a bit is that there are a hundred or so other Aussies in jail overseas for drug offences, yet no one seems to know them. Is it because she's young and beautiful, or is it because she pleaded not guilty?

[RhondaLee]

Indonedian Law is not based on English Law. Schapelle has been accused. The onus is on her to prove her innocence. Not the other way around.

Is Indonesia the only country like that? Guilty until proven innocent? This is absurd to me. In that case, why would anyone go to a place like that for vacation?



The Judges presiding over her trial; Yes. For your perusal http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15400604-2,00.html
.

To be fair, if anyone carrying a bag of weed and simply said "it's not her...someone put it there.", then millions of drug lord around the world would have walk free. The evidence is righ there in her bag, it's direct evidence.

If someone were to carry a bag of weed thru US Custom, caught, do you think that someone can say 'No...someone else put it there, it's not mine", and get away with it?

Anyhoo, what was her original purpose to Bali? Is it a vacation?

[Caitlin]

Ahhh... Miss Duce, To have ours minds shaped and moulded by those who can't do, but teach.

ppl... :rolleyes: nope... got no idea what the heck that is :dunno:

I have no idea what country your from, so I don’t know how familiar you are with my country, or our relations with Indonesia. You say in your profile info your from the best country on earth, so I’m going with the fact that your Australian then. Right Mate. But since you sprook US law, maybe your not.



To be fair, if anyone carrying a bag of weed and simply said "it's not her...someone put it there.", then millions of drug lord around the world would have walk free. The evidence is righ there in her bag, it's direct evidence.

If someone were to carry a bag of weed thru US Custom, caught, do you think that someone can say 'No...someone else put it there, it's not mine", and get away with it?

For RhondaLee and Miss Duce http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15469940-1702,00.html re: Customs report into drug smuggling at Australian airports

What overwhelming evidence points the finger at her? The evidence might be in her bag, but there is a high probability that it is not hers, and the Indonesian failed to prove that she was the only one to have had access to the bag, she had identified as being tampered with, and the Indonesians authorities had refused to fingerprint the bag.

A major important fact you are failing to grasp, is that drugs are smuggled out of Indonesia, not into it. It’s like either of you packing a bag full of drugs, and smuggling it into Columbia.


her defense fail to prove such existence of tampering with her bag
The prosecution failed to prove that the bag was not tampered with.


its not up to the prosecution in any country to prove someone's innocence.
That’s right. And your point is??


the taiwanese national cable that i get at home even suggested that austrialians were making a big deal out of this because she's white while austrialia has some 80 something other citizens in jail in other asian countries on similiar charges but most of them were asian. .
This may shatter your naiveté miss duce, but media and what they report are not without bias. Your right albear, the media is more often than not, skewed and biased.

The Bali nine caught for drug smuggling (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15469732-1702,00.html ) are a mixture of Asian and white, and none have the support by media, or the Australian public as Schapelle had, because it is so glaringly obvious that they are guilty. With Shappelle, there is a high probability that she is innocent.

Also, what has Australians riled, is that Abu Bakar Bashir, an instigator of the Bali bombings, where 100 plus Australians, and other tourist were killed, received a two year sentence, where Shapelle received twenty years, and may be facing the death sentence, because the prosecution is appealing on the leniency of the sentence.


another question that came up during the class discussion was the role of the austrailian govt. why were there no formal investigations into her defense claims of baggage handlers and corruption? instead the govt downplayed the situation of security risks at airports and ask ppl not to panic.
Just because the Government doesn’t publicly acknowledge what they are doing all the time, doesn’t mean that they are not doing anything. There is an inquiry into the handlers, cleaners, etc, and are overhauling security and hiring procedures. The fastest way to alienate someone and make them irritated with you is to jump up and down and point fingers at. Indonesia is Australia’s closest neighbour, handling delicate situations with tact and diplomacy is much a more mature option.




it seems that most austrailians blame the indonesians for their legal systems 'failure' and fail to look at the supposed orginal source of the problem. its pretty hard for the rest of the world to feel anything more than pity.
No, Australians don’t blame the Indonesians for their legal systems ‘failure’, they just don‘t agree with some aspects of their procedures.

Also there seems to be many problems about the whole affair. What is the original problem? You failed to enlighten us.



Anyhoo, what was her original purpose to Bali? Is it a vacation?
And your point :dunno:

[miss duece]

original problem = airport security risks IN austrailia

you say i have no point when i say that prosecution's job is not to prove someone's innocence. yet you say that they failed to prove that the bag wasn't tampered with. thats the defense's problem. prosecutors jobs are to PROSECUTE. they convince the judge or jury someone's guilty while the defense does the opposite. if you can't get the point of that then i'm sorry there's no simplier way to explain it.

whats your point that drugs are smuggled out of indonesia? it has nothing to do with this case where she was bringing it in. doesn't matter if the country is full of drugs already, the law still stands and exists.

its a forum i'm not gonna give myself a wedgie over this, just stating what young college americans, namely my international law class, feel on the subject matter. of course its expected that you'll be emotionally offended by anything other than the response you expect to get. just please don't go about talking down to other people claiming you're shattering their 'naivete'.

[RhondaLee]

And your point :dunno:

It wasn't a point I was trying to make, it was a question. That's why you see a symbol "?" at the end, which stands for "Question Mark".

If you don't know the answer, you don't have to respond.

[Caitlin]

you say i have no point when i say that prosecution's job is not to prove someone's innocence. yet you say that they failed to prove that the bag wasn't tampered with. thats the defense's problem. prosecutors jobs are to PROSECUTE. they convince the judge or jury someone's guilty while the defense does the opposite. if you can't get the point of that then i'm sorry there's no simplier way to explain it.

I never said you have no point, and … I never indicated that it is the prosecutors job to prove an accused innocent. What I’m saying is that, the bag is a crucial piece of evidence. Schapelle identified the bag as being tampered with. Authorities failed to procure or extract any other evidence from the bag other than the drugs.

The defence asked that the bag be fingerprinted, and this request was dismissed. Therefore, the tampered bag scenario could not be used by the defence to prove innocence, and since the tampered bag scenario was raised in court, it was not disproved by the prosecution. Therefore, by failing to do so in this matter, they did not disprove that she is innocent. If the prosecution could prove that the bag was not tampered with, then they would have strengthened their case that Schepelle is guilty (we are talking prior to conviction here).

And I’m not saying they had to, I’m just saying they didn’t. If you can’t get the point of that, then I’m sorry there’s no simpler was to explain it.



whats your point that drugs are smuggled out of indonesia? it has nothing to do with this case where she was bringing it in. doesn't matter if the country is full of drugs already, the law still stands and exists.

The point is, why would someone smuggle a bag full of marijuana from Australia, where the sale price for the commodity is quite high, to Indonesia, where the sale price for the same commodity is a much lower sale price, (and the standard conviction is the death penalty )?? I thought I was clear in my smuggling drugs to Columbia example to you. It is the unanswered ’Why?’ and doesn’t make sense. Therefore adds to her presumption of innocence.



of course its expected that you'll be emotionally offended by anything other than the response you expect to get.
No, not really. As you said, it’s a forum. I’m giving my opinion on the matter. Your post lacked tact, finesse and sensitivity, as did mine :)

[miss duece]

sigh...


its great that you have an opinion to state on the matter. just don't state your opinion on me please. i know an insult when i see it. it doesn't matter what kind of smilies are at the end of it either.

i'm not going to apologize for not meeting your 'standards' on what a forum post should look like. you can stop belittling me now. if i had violated one of these forum rules by any of my posts you can report me. like the old saying goes 'if you don't have nothing nice to say then don't say anything.'

[Caitlin]

i'm not going to apologize for not meeting your 'standards' on what a forum post should look like.
I have no ‘standards’ what a forum post should look like. But I do wish you stop implying things about me what are not true.



if i had violated one of these forum rules by any of my posts
Are there rules? I’m totally oblivious to them.



you can report me.
What on earth for miss duce? This is an open forum, where subject matters, topics and ideas are shared, discussed, thrashed out, mulled over, argued, debated, and deliberated.

[RhondaLee]

Schapelle identified the bag as being tampered with.


The point is, why would someone smuggle a bag full of marijuana from Australia, where the sale price for the commodity is quite high, to Indonesia, where the sale price for the same commodity is a much lower sale price, (and the standard conviction is the death penalty )?? I thought I was clear in my smuggling drugs to Columbia example to you. It is the unanswered ’Why?’ and doesn’t make sense. Therefore adds to her presumption of innocence.


How exactly can a person identify a bag with a zipper being tamper with? That she knows someone opens the zipper and close it?

And noone suspects her of selling the weed. But she's on vacation, so clearly the weed is used for her personal enjoyment while vacation at Bali. Hey, she's not the first tourist bringing weed while on vacation and surely won't be the last.

The part about the bio agent at the embassy, I never see these aussie have it in them. I can see throwing potatos or apple, but bio agent? What is next? Following those 22 indo embassy staff home and kill their families?

[albear]

We could probably argue about this until the cows come home, because there are so many intricacies and of course everyone has a different opinion. The biochemical matter turned out to be bacteria, but was not dangerous. And just like there can be extremists in any country or culture, they exist in Australia too. As Caitlin mentioned, a lot of Aussies are comparing what happened to Schapelle to what happened to Bashir with the Aussies who died in the Bali bombings and considering it a huge miscarriage of justice.

We aren't going to solve anything here by arguing about it though, I think in answer to the original question, I don't think I'd like a work of fiction based on the Corby story, because it's a little too close to my heart.

Just my $0.02, I'm bowing out of the conversation now :)

[Caitlin]

How exactly can a person identify a bag with a zipper being tamper with? That she knows someone opens the zipper and close it?

Schapelle said that when she zipps that bag, both zippers are at the top of the bag. She pointed out that when she picked up the bag, both zippers met in the middle.


And noone suspects her of selling the weed. But she's on vacation, so clearly the weed is used for her personal enjoyment while vacation at Bali. Hey, she's not the first tourist bringing weed while on vacation and surely won't be the last.
I didn't say she was selling the weed. I'm pointing something out. She is on vacation. That's right. So she would want as much spending money as possible. Right. So why buy the weed from a country, where the price is quite high, and smuggle it into a country where she could purchase the weed for a much lower price, and sidestep the smuggling issue, with the possibility of being apprehended, and gacing a long term in jail, or the possibility of the death sentance?

If she wanted to save money, smoke dope while on holiday, and and live to tell about it, she would have brought it there, not smuggle it in.


The part about the bio agent at the embassy, I never see these aussie have it in them. I can see throwing potatos or apple, but bio agent?
What has this got to do with Schapelle Corby. It's the action of one person not 'these aussies'. In tonights news, it was suppose to be harmless white powder, and Corby's name was not used in the letter that accompanied the letter.


I can see throwing potatos or apple, but bio agent? What is next? Following those 22 indo embassy staff home and kill their families?
:eek: :eek: A bit extreemist in our outlook arn't we. But then according to you Quote "Wouldn't it be something for this news to transform into a BDSM enslavement story."Unquote, so I shouldn't be surprised by your outlook ;)

[maamsboy]

i don't believe that the Australian public has been given all of the facts pertaining to this case.
the media will only tell the public what they want us to know and what will sell papers.
it is unfortunate what has happened to her, but it is a cross she will have to bare. nothing done (action wise) in Australia is going to change the outcome of her sentence. 20yrs may be unfair but that is the way it is run over there in Indonesia.
i have heard 'talk' that she is a drug runner and that her boy friend is a bikie gang leader. her boy friend is also the brother of the person that has 'bank rolled' her defence.
once again, this is what i have heard and quite possiblilty rumour. but every rumour has an once of truth in it.

[Caitlin]

I have my opinions on the media, but I would find them a more reliable source than your 'talk' maamsboy.

[slavedriver]

A coupl of points to ponder

1.The police themselves addmitted that they did not have eneogh evidence to convict (sadly her lawyers whilst probably good chose the wrong defence strategy)
2.The bag containing the drugs was not in her possession at the time(she was asked if the bag was hers and to open it after it had passed through how many hands?[akin to shooting someone then giving the gun to someone else. No matter how you look at that scenario the person that did the deed is the guilty one the other is just an innocent patsy])
3. The judges at the trial (and only those judges) have never given an innocent verdict. These same judges stated publicly that they did not care what happened outside Indonesia so it did not really matter what the defense tried to prove in that regard
4. In America you are innocent till proved guilty in Indonesia you are guilty till proven innocent an entirely different legal system to what you are used to
5. Media will only provide information that will sell as that is their business they do not care if the only facts reported are skewed to that ideal as a non story will not bring in revenue. If you do not believe this then ask your media lecturers and then check on various media outlets in your area on a subject that you know to be true you will be shocked at just how two or three media barons can control the world.(James Bond's The World Is Not Eneogh is not just some script writers fantasy)
6.If someone places a $250,000 diamond necklace into your bag without your knowledge are you guilty or innocent( personally i would hope that you would be found innocent as it is the prosecutions duty to prove you
a)stole it
b)had knowledge of the theft
Contrary to popular belief it is not the defence's duty to prove you innocent it is the prosecutor's job to prove you guilty the notion of the defence having to prove you innocent is a myth propergated by the media and allowed to flourish by lazy prosecutors.(sadly though due to dramatisation by the visual media ,mainly, it is not something that i believe will ever be redressed as it will kill off half of any court drama)
7. If someone is studying internation laws then they should do so without predjudice, that is just because it happens that way here it should happen that way there, if you ask most peoples of the world their main grievance against other countries they will tell you that they are fed up with people telling them how the laws should be in their countries.A case point if you want one is the US's stand on human rights treaties in foriegn countries when the US has so far failed to abide by most of the treaties it has with Native Americans

I could probably go on for hours but if you don't get the point of the disscussion by now you never will so i will leave you all to ponder what i have posted just remember though that these are MY views and it is up to you to decide what your views are

[miss duece]

do you happen to mean the media in australia? the ones that's biased to corby? the one that caused all this hype? its a funny thing how there's almost no attention paid to other australian citizens rotting away in other various asian prisons.

[RhondaLee]

Schapelle said that when she zipps that bag, both zippers are at the top of the bag. She pointed out that when she picked up the bag, both zippers met in the middle.

That's right. So she would want as much spending money as possible. Right. So why buy the weed from a country, where the price is quite high, and smuggle it into a country where she could purchase the weed for a much lower price, and sidestep the smuggling issue, with the possibility of being apprehended, and gacing a long term in jail, or the possibility of the death sentance?

If she wanted to save money, smoke dope while on holiday, and and live to tell about it, she would have brought it there, not smuggle it in.


If the zipper is in the wrong spot, why doesn't she open it right away and check if something is missing?

She couldn't have buy the weed over there while on vacation because she is a tourist. When I go on vacation, I have trouble finding a store that sells postage stamp, but I don't use drugs, so I won't be looking it in another country.

We are talking about weed, not newspaper, how's she supposed to find it while she has a limited days on a vacation, when she said it herself, that she doesn't speak their language.

If you go on vacation to a new place, regardless whether you have been to that place a few times, how easy can it be to find weed? Without knowing anyone?

So why waste all that time while her hotel rate is being billed by the day, when she can bring some from homeland?

So bringing in from Australia makes perfect sense to me.

Besides, what if she is a airhead who doesn't know the penalty is life in prison or death sentence on smuggle drugs?

[miss duece]

back to the orginal topic of the thread. i think there's nothing wrong with writing the story if thats what you really wanted to do. just put some kind of disclaimer or whatever in the beginning warning the potential reader. afterall, no one's forcing anyone to read anything. if it doesn't suit their tastes its not your problem if you've warned them. there's plenty of other stories to read on this site.

[chromedome11]

We are talking about weed, not newspaper, how's she supposed to find it while she has a limited days on a vacation, when she said it herself, that she doesn't speak their language.

I haven't been to Indonesia, but I've been to Jamaica. You can easily buy weed within one hour of landing at the airport. There are pushers everywhere. I suspect it's the same in Indonesia, because it's a very profitable business.

I'm with Caitlin on this. No one in their right mind would smuggle weed into a third world country. Even if she did, 20 years is a ridiculously long sentence for possession. Murderers get away with much less.

[miss duece]

maybe in canada it would be long, but according to the indonesians, twenty years for 9lbs of weed is light and they're appealing for a harsher sentence. in china anything over five pounds is a automatic death sentence if you're found guilty. different countries just do things differently. i've been to indonesia, i didn't find pushers at every corner contrary to your beliefs. but i did find a lot of food stalls that gave me stomach aches later.

on another note, it doesn't matter if anyone thought the trial was fair or not in the end. what right does australian public have to tell or strong arm a soverign nation, recognized by the international community, how to run their system, especially when the government of indonesia poses no military threat? she got caught in indonesian soil, its their jurisdiction. there goes objectiveness for you.

[Caitlin]

RhondaLee, If you can’t find postage stamps, then we know who the airhead is.


maybe in canada it would be long, but according to the indonesians, twenty years for 9lbs of weed is light and they're appealing for a harsher sentence. in china anything over five pounds is a automatic death sentence if you're found guilty. different countries just do things differently.
Different countries, may do things differently, but I’m sure that 20 years is a long time out of anyones life regardless what country they come from. I’m sure the poor guy facing the firing squad would consider his sentence extreem for carrying five pounds of marauana.


different countries just do things differently. i've been to indonesia, i didn't find pushers at every corner contrary to your beliefs.
I havent actually been to Indonesia, but I’m sure they don’t have a flashing light on their head to get your attention.


on another note, it doesn't matter if anyone thought the trial was fair or not in the end.
Why not? Aren’t people allowed to have an opinion? :confused:


what right does australian public have to tell or strong arm a soverign nation, recognized by the international community
How is the Australian public strong arming the soverign nation of Indonesia? :dunno:


, how to run their system,
Is that what the Australian public doing? I live in Australia. I missing all this action!!! Where is your sourse to make that statement miss duece? :dunno:


especially when the government of indonesia poses no military threat?
Miss duece, you really need to do your homework. Especially if your going to make such ludicrous statements.


she got caught in indonesian soil, its their jurisdiction. there goes objectiveness for you.
Can't the Australian public have an opinion what happens to one of their citizens, weather that person be overseas or not? Besides...

During WW2, An american serviceman was caught murdering a woman in Melbourne, and it was discovered that he had killed several women on Australian soil. Australian law was not recognised, and bypassed, and the US Military had tried the man, even though he was still on Australian soil. According to your own law, you had set a precident for this to occur. How, then do you condem this??? I really don’t think international law is your fortee miss duece. What was your second option for uni?

[miscolata]

4. In America you are innocent till proved guilty in Indonesia you are guilty till proven innocent an entirely different legal system to what you are used to


In Western countries you aren't supposed to have a conviction if there is "reasonable doubt", and that is what the defence is trying to establish. Possibly in Indonesia there is a greater burden on the defence, but the prosecution still has to make its case - they're not supposed to just assume that the police got it right.

Since quoting the SMH seems to be the order of the topic, here's an article to that affect: http://www.smh.com.au/news/Miranda-Devine/Contempt-for-Indonesian-law-unfounded/2005/05/22/1116533585154.html (I can't believe I'm quoting a Miranda Divine column with approval... unclean! unclean! ick. Your Honour, in my defence I'd like to point out that she's not expressing her own opinion in this article)

The main difference (according to my legal theory lecturer) is that the Indonesians don't have quite the same take on the "better ten guilty men walk free than one innocent man go to gaol" principle that dictates a lot of the rules of evidence in countries like the USA and Australia.

We in the West (and yes, I'm Australian) are stunned and shocked when the Indonesians convict on evidence that our systems would automatically put huge questions marks over. Indonesians are stunned and shocked when "clearly" guilty people are acquitted in Western countries because of some technical breach in the handling of evidence. We think they're crazy, they think we're crazy. What fun :)

And on the topic of the drugs themselves... don't forget that there are a lot of different types of marijuana. I read somewhere that the variety in question is relatively cheap in Australia and quite expensive in Bali - so there was a sound economic reason to import it into Bali.

As for our government intervening... I'd be more interested in seeing them do something for David Hicks in Guantanamo Bay, or for the several hundred innocent people going stir-crazy in immigration detention centres on our own soil.

[RhondaLee]

And on the topic of the drugs themselves... don't forget that there are a lot of different types of marijuana. I read somewhere that the variety in question is relatively cheap in Australia and quite expensive in Bali - so there was a sound economic reason to import it into Bali.



based on that information, is it possible the weed is like different brand name of cigarettes? The one that she carry has the taste that favor her, so she sticks to the one that she is used to? Or she is afraid she can get caught of buying weed in the local city in Bali, or she is afraid the person selling weed is an undercover agent, thus, she brings her own.

[Dododecapod]

You know, I am so sick of the whole Corby crap. You can't turn on a TV here without hearing YET ANOTHER know-nothing "expert" crapping on about it.

My fantasy would be someone like me, utterly sick of the whole thing, going to Indonesia, stealing her from the jail, then broadcasting her rape and humiliation to the whole world, and finishing it up with a long, strangulation hanging (or maybe a draw-and-quartering!).

The story would finish with the killer facing the camera (with a mask) and saying "All right! It's over! START TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MATTERS, ALREADY!"

[miscolata]

based on that information, is it possible the weed is like different brand name of cigarettes? The one that she carry has the taste that favor her, so she sticks to the one that she is used to? Or she is afraid she can get caught of buying weed in the local city in Bali, or she is afraid the person selling weed is an undercover agent, thus, she brings her own.

More like different varieties of the plant and different growing techniques produce different concentrations of THC (the psychoactive chemical in marijuana... please don't make me write it out in full). In particular there are some modern varieties that are very very strong compared to what you'd get on the street even ten years ago.

If she was knowingly importing it then it's a safe bet she was importing it for money not personal use.

[miss duece]

"Why not? Aren’t people allowed to have an opinion?"

OH i'm so sorry. did i say people weren't allowed to have an opinion? i said it doesn't matter because it won't change the verdict, its their jurisdiction.

"Miss duece, you really need to do your homework. Especially if your going to make such ludicrous statements. "

why don't you do your homework and tell me what concrete immediate military threat indonesia poses?

"How is the Australian public strong arming the soverign nation of Indonesia?"

so demands of boycott, demands of withdrawal of aid, and demands that the prime minister should contact the indonesian president over the case, is not strong arming?
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1380121.htm
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Call-for-Bali-boycott/2005/05/27/1117129880725.html
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,15446774%255E661,00.html


"RhondaLee, If you can’t find postage stamps, then we know who the airhead is."

why are you always belittling people who don't agree with you?


"I havent actually been to Indonesia, but I’m sure they don’t have a flashing light on their head to get your attention. "

i was responding to chromes that he thinks indonesia maybe the same as jamica where you can just spot pushers right away. so by your own point then your saying its hard to find pushers, then why won't it be fesible that corby brought her own drugs?

"During WW2, An american serviceman was caught murdering a woman in Melbourne, and it was discovered that he had killed several women on Australian soil. Australian law was not recognised, and bypassed, and the US Military had tried the man, even though he was still on Australian soil. According to your own law, you had set a precident for this to occur. How, then do you condem this??? I really don’t think international law is your fortee miss duece. What was your second option for uni?"

so by your own prejudice, since i'm american i must agree with everything my country does? who are you to tell me what my fortee is? why don't you try being nicer to people who don't agree with you and be more civilize instead of resorting to childish things like calling people airheads, saying I lack finesse or sensitivity when your outright being insulting, or that i'm studying the wrong thing or whatever condescending things that you think makes your points stronger. i can't recall one time where i saw as much hostility as you have displayed to others on this forum.



food for thought:
http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,15462198,00.html

other side of the spectrum:
http://www.dailygrail.com/node/1491

[RhondaLee]

http://www.dailygrail.com/node/1491

I think the above link is the most effective.


Corrupt person 4: A baggage handler at Sydney airport. Forgets to take the dope out of CORBY's bag and off it goes to Bali.

For 9 lb. of weed, if there really were a person who put that in her bag, he's not going to forget take it out. And there is just too many holes about the fairy tales of baggage handler putting it in her bag.

In one of the link at news.com.au, they interview a large number of australian on their view, most of them don't support her and believe she is guilty. I have read it, but when I go back, news.com charges me for that link when I try to dig back out that link.

http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,15462198,00.html

this link is also very good. Just because she looks innocent, doesn't mean she is innocent. When she finds out she is on trial, obviously she is crying, the fear of prison. She didn't realize bringing 9 lb. of weed can causes her so much trouble. It's remorse.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15492951-2,00.html

this is the man who finance corby on her legal fee, look at the way he flashes his stack of dollar bills.

Edit: found that link: Instead of posing the link, I'll post the entire text, because news.com.au has known to delete the link and story sometime later.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15423471-31317,00.html

[RhondaLee]

Your feedback on the Corby verdict - II
By NEWS.com.au readers
May 27, 2005
From:


This is a selection of your feedback on the verdict in Schapelle Corby's drug-smuggling trial.
We have been overwhelmed by your responses and will be updating the feedback over the next few days.

Read earlier comments.

From: anthony
Comment: Why is there so much commotion? who actually knows that she is innocent? only she knows and will ever know, besides the people that gave her the drugs. Plenty of other Aussies around the world in same predicaments that no one cares about. if u wish to test a system, do so at your own peril.

From: dan
Comment: I think the overattention and hype by media and Australians are big contributory factors in Corby's unfortunate saga. How can everybody be so judgmental and sure of her innocence. Even if she was all this hype was really detrimental to her case. Anyway I wish her best of luck and pray that her higher appeal gets successful and she is released or transferred to Australia along with all other Australians rotting in Indonesian jails.

From: mike
Comment: There is no way can she be seen as guilty beyond reasonable doubt. For John Howard to say we should just accept the decision is plain stupid. Would we just accept the decision if it was Taliban and an Islamic court? Of course not. I am sure he would not be so 'high handed' if it was his daughter. Why are they prepared to pay for QC's now? Because they know she is innocent.

From: Christiaan
Comment: No one here can fairly judge either Corby or the Indonesian justice system - none of us know all the facts, only what is portrayed in the media. The Indonesian court considered the facts under the Indonesian legal system, and found Corby guilty. Based on what I saw in the media reports, none of Corby's arguments could dispute the facts, nor did she present any hard evidence in defense. Australia should accept the legal decision of the court as correct and final - as we would expect Indonesia to do if the situation was reversed.

From: Phillip
Comment: What is the use of trying to defend yourself in Indonesia, the judges do not listen to any defence. Boycott Bali and Indonesia and pressure our government to withdraw aid and free Schapelle Corby. This is the beginning of the end for Bali.

From: Jeanie
Comment: My heart goes out to Schapelle. I truly believe she was set up. I will never travel to Indonesia and hopefully none of my family will either.

From: Georgia
Comment: For those of you who dont know Bali Law, Every August of Every year, The Prime minister is allowed to give pardon to half a dozen prisoners. You people must be crazy if you think Ms Corby is going to remain in prison for 20 years. Its all about politics. If they had let her off the charges, Politically it would have looked like Bali is bowing down to the Australian Government. The indonesians owe this to the Australians and they know it. but at the same time had to prove to the world that smuggling drugs into bali is not something the indonesian goverments takes lightly.

[RhondaLee]

From: mikal
Comment: Guilty or not , no other person has had such positive publicity. I will not ever go to Bali and will boycott travel to the whole region for my entire life as I do not want to risk being in such a situation. A travesty of justice if she is innocent. Remember it was 15 years in jail in the 70's for possession the smallest quantity in Queensland.

From: Senan
Comment: In a civilized country the law dictates that you are guilty if there is no 'shadow of a doubt about your guilt'. In Schapelle's case, there is a 'shadow of doubt'. I can only surmise that this implies Indonesia is what I suspected, uncivilized!!

From: Gayle
Comment: I cried openly for the Tsunami victims, I cried openly for the earthquake victims, and sent assistance. I cried openly today at the lack of a civilised justice system in Indonesia. I would not risk my life travelling there again.

From: Linda
Comment: Please stop blaming the Indonesian justice system because of the Corby's case. We should know that when people go abroad, they are subjected to the justice system of the countries they visit. I totally agree that twenty years of jail is quite harsh, but that's the other country's rule. We all can't sure if Corby is innocent or not. But, according to the Indonesian officials, she had admitted to owning the drugs at the airport but later started denying it. Why we all just believe Corby's defending team? How about if the Indonesian officials had told the truth? Don't you think you could not realize your boogie board bag was much heavier if 4.1 kg of marijuana had been planted into it? Don't you believe a stranger would come to you and totally financially support you just because he believed you were innocent (bear in mind that he had financial difficulties)? Hey, a drug dealer will never admit he or she is a drug dealer. DO THINK ABOUT THE VICTIMS OF DRUGS! Do you stand aside just because a drug dealer is young and beautiful . If so, shame on you!!

From: terry
Comment: never will i travel to Bali, i'm cancelling a trip as we speak, it doesn't matter if she's guilty or innocent, the punishment does NOT fit the crime, and if she's innocent, she will suffer this forever my heart breaks for her and her family.

From: Matt
Comment: Congratulations on two parts. One for Western media outlets who, by applying such strong pressure on the court, helped cause the judges to dig their heels and lead to a more likely outcome of being found guilty before the trial had even finished. And two, for Downer offering QCs free of charge to help Schapelle after the horse has bolted.

From: Tom
Comment: why are we even putting people in prison for possessing a plant that grows naturally on our planet? It's kind of like saying god made a mistake, don't you think?

From: Shell
Comment: Unfortunately, this is going to affect the Balinese people as numerous Australians will be hesistant to visit Bali. I know I would be loathe to go there as it appears guilt is presumed and defences ignored. Given the other circumstances where people have found drugs in their luggage, it's totally plausible the same may have happened in Schapelle's case. I think Australia should find a way to bring her home, disregard the Indonesian ruling and conduct their own trial.

From: Rea
Comment: It was preposterous! I think Indonesia is trying to make a bloody statement at the expense of one innocent person. There is bias obviously. A man who killed hundreds of Australian got a very lenient sentence, whereas someone who is not their own got a bloody 20 years! I think Australia's taxpayers should rethink and reconsider sending aid to Indonesia. Indonesia is hyprocrite. Drugs are everywhere on the streets!

From: Richard
Comment: Stick to the facts people! I am yet to hear/see anyone say that they have read the full transcript of the court proceedings and confirm or refute the judgement made. please don't base your opinions on the limited information the media provide. otherwise you are just buying into the hysteria to create ratings. Lets not demand justice until we have demanded the facts first! I Challenge a media organisation on behalf of the Australian people to find these facts and publish them un-edited.

From: Lauren
Comment: How can anyone here say that this is justice. It is the biggest miscarriage of justice of all... kill hundreds of Australians and get 2.5 years, but instead we watch a case with too much reasonable doubt (remember, the innocent until proven guilty adage) and people here are unsympathetic to a 27 year old getting 20 years for a crime she has not committed. You should be ashamed of yourselves...

From: Greg
Comment: Will all the Schapelle Corby supporters please stop saying "all Australia wants..." to support their please for her release? All THIS Australian wants is for the justice system of a sovereign country to be respected! In Indonesia the presumption is guilt and the onus on the accused to prove innocence (as it is in several countries around the world). I wasn't there, but nothing reported in the media as having been presented as EVIDENCE has done anything to PROVE her innocence. There is some vague and circumstantial claims (not EVIDENCE) that in Australia MAY establish reasonable doubt. That is all.

From: Jenny
Comment: Why does not one care about those young kids that are going through the same ordeal?

From: Paul
Comment: Imagine yourself in her position. How would you prove that you are innocent when you are presumed guilty? Honest people don't go about their lives making sure they have alibi just in case for every occasion! Presumption of guilt is just plain wrong - a method used by corrupt totalitarian governments to enforce their kind of "law".

From: Charlie
Comment: I think that all Australians should rethink their view on the case, just because she is a beautiful young Australian girl does not mean she is an angel. If we had a case in Australia where an international had 10kg of any drug in their bags and their defense was they do not know how it got there then we would all laugh and accuse them of drug smuggling. I think she is GUILTY. Give her life!

From: Matthew
Comment: If Schapelle is Innocent then my heart is with her and her family, but for all you pathetic People who say unjust comments like "Lets Boycott Bali" and "Stop Funding Monkeys". Shame on you and your insignificent Lives.

From: Daniel
Comment: I firmly believe Schapelle is innocent, why would anyone smuggle marijuana into Indonesia when you can buy it so cheaply on the streets there? The Prosecution could not establish a motive, meaning there was surely some reasonable doubt. God be with you Schapelle, don't give up!

From: Ronnie
Comment: As hard as it is to accept the verdict, Australians should not bring in what we have done for Indonesia as a defence for the case. It is unfortunate what has happened, but deal with it, let the appeals take place and move on.

From: Paul
Comment: Respect the law of other countries guys, and please don't allow a CONVICTED drug smuggler to come home to serve out her sentence in the relative comfort of home. You do the crime, you do the time and in the country you did the offence.

From: Rick
Comment: The Indonesian people are nice people it is their law that is not so nice. Schapelle would never have been convicted in Australia on the evidence presented. The point that needs to be looked at now, failing appeals etc, is that if we are to have a prisoner exchange it should be similar to I think what France's extradition treaty is with Indonesia and that is when the prisoner is returned home they are re tried on the evidence and if convicted sentenced to what they would receive under French law. To have Schapelle come home and have to serve twenty years is laughable - a lot of people in this country would get a fine or 12 months for that amount of marihuana- 20 years? Downer and the Government need to look at this a lot closer than I believe is being done at the present time.

From: Andrew
Comment: Lets get over the emotion and focus on the fact that many seem to be unable to believe - Schappelle received a fair trial and was found guilty. Many of the comments and disbelief are starting to border on racism - if an Indonesian was caught in similar circumstances coming into Australia, many of the people defending Schapelle would be calling for a life sentence!

From: Adele
Comment: After watching the live verdict, which I found to be very upsetting, she didn't have a hope of getting off with a lighter sentence, the justice system seems to have got it all wrong, why was the bag not fingerprinted? if this was not done over here there would be no case. I was also very upset to hear the cheers that came from their people, absolutely disgusting, I for one will not be travelling over there again, if we can't trust our bags not to be interfered here what are our chances of being another innocent victim. From: Katherine
Comment: A fair and just verdict. Already Corby has received more attention, aid and assistance than any other. I commend the Indonesian government for having such steadfast laws. Lets now put our energy and resources in to assisting someone being held unjustly such as Douglas Wood.

[RhondaLee]

From: Shidesha
Comment: This is quite frightening. A lot of Australians are becoming so racist against the Indonesians and I plead with you to not go down that path. Just because the Judge has an opinion about ONE Australian, does NOT mean we should hold a grudge against the entire country, its both immature and extremely dangerous. I personally love Indonesian people, and the country itself. However, I dislike their justice system immensely, and I am now very frightened of it. Il do whatever is in my power to help Schapelle, even though she is guilty - she doesnt deserve this sentence. So I urge my fellow Australians to not fall into the trap of racism, and focus on helping Schapelle, not insulting an entire country of individuals who have nothing to do with this case and are just as normal and nice as we can be.

From: Mike
Comment: I'm from the USA, not familiar with the Australian justice system but I'm sure it's similar to ours. This case seems like a mockery of justice and I will never visit Indonesia. It is too bad that the international aid cannot be easily withdrawn, I personally would not want to support such a regime.

From: Tony
Comment: Ken, obviously you haven't been paying much attention to Schapelle's case and the so called Bali nine. One huge difference is they were caught with the drugs strapped to their bodies and not in their boogy board bag.

From: kylie
Comment: By new laws created since sept 11 you are not allowed to place locks on your bags when traveling anywhere in the world so why should she be labeled stupid by so many of you people out there read up on the law and then you can make judgment not even a lawyer and I know the laws. Come on Johnny do something I am sorry this is a waste of a true Aussie.

From: nell
Comment: Is she actually guilty? Only Shapelle knows the answer to that question. The case has been smothered by the media, resulting in the majority of Australia convinced she is innocent. Maybe we shouldn't be so presumptions?

From: pete
Comment: As wrong as it is, this verdict, whether it is right or wrong will cost Indonesia millions if not billions of dollars over the next 10 years. I for one will never travel there. Not because of this case alone but because if your not set up and convicted of drug smuggling by the most corrupt legal system in the world, you might get killed by government assisted terrorists or even natural disasters. Stay home Aussies, put your money into Australia, the best and safest country in the world.

From: Ann
Comment: I am in total shock at the verdict. That poor girl has had her life taken away when there was no evidence to support the claim that the drugs were hers. The applause in the court room has left a very bitter taste in my mouth and will make me think twice before supporting there country!

From: ellie
Comment: I understand that Indonesian government wants to punish someone for bringing drugs into their country, but I believe they are punishing a wrong person. It is their job to find out the truth and obviously they are not doing a good job. Schapelle should not be suffering from their incompetence.

From: Kate
Comment: All this arguing about whether she is innocent or guilty is masking the reality of her conditions. No one should be locked away under those squalid conditions for a bag of grass. Unbelievable hypocrisy.

From: Shaun
Comment: Perhaps some people need to take a chill pill and ask themselves, was it chance her bag was searched or was there another reason she was picked out?

From: Megan
Comment: I watched the live verdict and found myself emotionally becoming a part of it. I feel for Schapelle, and don't think she deserves such a sentence; guilty or not guilty. If she is innocent, I hope that whoever the true culprit is, is feeling enormous guilt for taking a way 20 years of another person's life.

From: Steve
Comment: As unsavoury as this verdict is, we have no choice but to accept it. All this knee jerk shouts to withdraw out tsunami aid achieves nothing. A judge can only adjudicate on evidence presented. Unfortunately, Indonesian law (as I understand it) needs some hard evidence that the drugs were not Corby's. A lot of circumstantial heresay was presented but nothing else. However the battle is not over and I believe, 12 months from now, Schappelle's case will probably alter Indonesian law. The validity of circumstantial evidence will be tested in the Supreme court as Corby's lawyers argue her innocence on the grounds that tampering could have taken place and that the prosecution cannot guarantee 100% the that drugs are in fact hers and put there by her. The Indonesia people have done no wrong.

From: Andrew
Comment: Do I think Schapelle Corby or somebody traveling with her owned the drugs? Yes I do. The penalty however is absolutely ludicrous! And how dare the Indonesians cheer at the verdict when nine Australians recently lost their lives whilst trying to help their people!!

From: Bob
Comment: Guilty as charged, how can all these people claim that she is innocent, do they know her, were they with her when she got caught or are they just reading the papers who are trying to make money?? Wake up, if it was a young male would we jumping up and down like this??

From: Matt
Comment: We have to put this whole case into perspective. The majority of us believe she is innocent yet what are we basing this on? Probably only gut feeling. The defence was based on plenty of hearsay and circumstantial evidence. The notion of dodgy bag handlers at the airport does not seem like a very strong case. The important thing is that we don't label Indonesia and importantly Bali because of it. The Balinese people do not deserve to suffer due to what many believe as the only verdict that could have come from this case.

From: Eric
Comment: I am Canadian and I have been following this case from the beginning. Sadly, the verdict does not surprise me. If I lived in Australia, I would do all that I could to discourage anyone from travelling to any part of Indonesia...period. I will never travel without my luggage being with me at all times. My days of checked baggage are over. Please remember Shapelle and all other prisoners in your prayers.

From: Darryl
Comment: Guilty maybe. BUT 20 years is pathetic for such a crime. That is my only concern.

From: Tony
Comment: I only have one question for our PM, would he accept the verdict if it was his daughter?

From: Chris
Comment: If John Howard had any guts, he'd withdraw our tsunami funding to Indonesia, withdraw any troops assisting in their own in-fighting and anything else where we have granted assistance. If the Bali Bomber gets a slap on the wrist for killing many Aussies, and Corby goes down for pot, why should we help them?

From: Tristan
Comment: I think she is lucky to get only 20 years, I was expecting life. Anyway is she actually guilty? Probably yes, at the least she guilty of stupidity. I'm pretty sure when picking up her boogy board bag, it would be very easy to tell that there was 4.1 kg of marijuana in it and not a boogy board, if you think your bag is tampered with, just walk away. Don't try and sneak it through customs. Secondly I think the one-sided view of the majority of Australians is appalling. So many people think she's innocent because white and pretty. If she were Asian etc. then she would have no where near as much support, from the public or the media.

From: Sue
Comment: I think if a country can not look at all the evidence to make an inform decision then that country is not worth it for tourism or aid. I will certainly not be helping out a country that cannot conduct their legal system in a just and fair way

From: Geoff
Comment: "honest" John Howard asks us to respect the justice system of another country when we cannot trust or respect his own government's judicial , immigration and detention systems. On the other hand - why should'nt he treat the Australian people as mugs - we put him back in.

From: Blake
Comment: If Beazley wants to win the next election he should do everything in his power to get Scapelle back to Australia. Stand with the majority and he can't lose.

From: Georgia
Comment: Jarrod, under a prisoner exchange treaty Schapelle can be brought back to Australia - but this does not mean she is eligible for early parole or any such niceties. She would remain subject to Indonesia's laws even though she is in Australia. No easy wins on this one.

From: Jonny
Comment: I think the defence did well, as she is not being shot dead. That to me in Indonesia is a success. Many before Schapelle have not enjoyed that outcome of similar cases.

From: Ian
Comment: This case brings an interesting incident to mind. My girlfriend's cousin from California was detained by customs at Sydney Airport on New Years' Eve after finding cannabis in her luggage. After being detained for several hours she was let off with a warning and allowed to enter the country. Apparently the incident was not recorded against her passport. Interesting times...

[Caitlin]

so by your own prejudice

Prejudice miss duce :confused: I mealy pointed out that America had set a precedence on a topic you were talking about. I don’t know how you deducted I’m prejudice by mentioning a precedence :dunno:



so by your own prejudice, since i'm american i must agree with everything my country does?
No dear girl. And I never hinted at such. I don't lump everyone in the same basket.



"RhondaLee, If you can’t find postage stamps, then we know who the airhead is."

why are you always belittling people who don't agree with you?



Nay miss duece :eek: You do me wrong again. I only used RhondaLee's own words. (See below) She casted the first stone ;) I mearly picked it up and handed it back ;)


I have trouble finding a store that sells postage stamp....



Besides, what if she is a airhead

[Dododecapod]

During WW2, An american serviceman was caught murdering a woman in Melbourne, and it was discovered that he had killed several women on Australian soil. Australian law was not recognised, and bypassed, and the US Military had tried the man, even though he was still on Australian soil.

Not quite accurate. The man was a rapist, not a murderer. Australia had first dibs on him, due to the crime occuring on Australian soil, but chose to surrender him to the US military. The reason? Australia, at the time imposed the death penalty only for murder, while the US military had (and still does have, I believe) the DP for rape. So, the Australian government allowed the US military to try him by Court Martial, and he was taken off to one of the US islands and hung.

There was a LOT of controversy about it in Australia at the time, but it was primarily aimed at the Attorney General, whom it was felt had erred in handing the serviceman over.

[Caitlin]

Dododecapod. Thanks sweets. I knew about it, but vaguely. Had the story slightly skewed, but I didn’t know where to look.

[maamsboy]

Indonesia is not a military threat and if you believe they are, where is your proof to support you statement?
miss duece is correct in her statement.

[miss duece]

thank you.

[allalone46]

Not quite accurate. The man was a rapist, not a murderer. Australia had first dibs on him, due to the crime occuring on Australian soil, but chose to surrender him to the US military. The reason? Australia, at the time imposed the death penalty only for murder, while the US military had (and still does have, I believe) the DP for rape. So, the Australian government allowed the US military to try him by Court Martial, and he was taken off to one of the US islands and hung.

There was a LOT of controversy about it in Australia at the time, but it was primarily aimed at the Attorney General, whom it was felt had erred in handing the serviceman over. There was and still is a treaty about it, though pres. Clinton suspended it, and if a asome one in the Australia military or several other contries mitatarys that the US has simialar treatys with did something thay would get him or her to prosicute as well. Oh one other thing, under the UCMJ it is the opoiset than in US civilian cort, In militay cort you have to prove you are inasent, not the prociuter prove you gilty

[Sweep]

I have a good mate who lives in Bali with his Balinese wife.

I was talking to him last week. I'd be very wary of arguing for Shapells innocence after what he told me.

They have followed the case closely as actual observers not via the media. Moreover, they speak Bahasa Indonesian and his wife speaks Balinese as well and they know the culture and the legal system.

Shapelle has got a nre more savvy legal team who will get an appeal and find a suitably corrupt official to declare a mistrial based on insufficient evidence. That doesn't mean that she did'nt do it.

There are no shortage of corrupt officials as I have become quite aware from my frequent visits to Indonesia.

My feeling is that corruption is decreasing under the influence of the current government and one is often pleasantly surprised these days to meet an official who is quite uncorrupt and professional.