Chapelle Corby

[zzz]

Every country has problems in their legal system.

Australia as well - our immigration system allows people to be detained without charge and without a presumption of innocence which has resulted in one Australian citizen being detained and another deported. Neither should have been anywhere near a detention centre.

As Damien has pointed out the indonesian system is similar to some European systems and it is based on an assumption of innocence. These systems often work in a less adversarial manner as well - the goal is to find the truth of the situation - not for one party to 'beat' the other.

Corby has not yet even been convicted, yet everyone is crying foul of the indonesian legal system - why not wait and see what the verdict is first.

Australia would never have let an indonesian criminal into our country to testify for an indonesian found smuggling drugs into australia yet the indonesians have allowed an Australian criminal into their country to testify on Corby's behalf.

The only valid criticism I could level is the lack of fingerprinting and allowing corby to handle the bag before finger printing it. But who knows - that could also have proven her guilt rather than left an opening for her innocence - its actually not impossible that they deliberately didn't fingerprint the bags to leave an opening for her. I don't know how their system works but its their country, and they've got every right to detain and try someone that comes into it with marijuana in their bag.

It would appear to me that the bloke that was caught with guns on his boat handled the situation much better. Quietly, no media spotlight, no idiots like Ron Bakhir running around trying to big note themselves, and a good, face saving outcome for all.

[murrum]

Laz,
what do you know?
They do sound like good enough reasons to me.

[oldman]

The arguments about the judicial systems is beside the point really. These are great intellectual debates but have little to do with reality here. It is a smokescreen.

The problem is that the investigation was bungled, the finger-printing was bungled, the aircraft weigh-in information was bungled, the judges themselves handled the bags, in spite of the fact that the defence was still asking for fingerprinting. There is more than good reason to suggest that the customs officers were also verballed. Three of them couldn't speak english, but somehow came up with the exact same statement as the one who could. This version had no correlation with that of half a dozen other witnesses,

And then you have the cultural problem of 'saving face' when one is demonstrably wrong. The outcome of this trial will be more about saving face for the Indo judiciary than it will be about guilt or innocence.

None of us knows for certain that she is guilty or innocent. The fact is that a number of glaring and obvious opportunities to help prove her innocence were denied her.

Fact!

[Larry]

Ron - the risk is having the shit on your hands any longer than need be

Half a day from the Riverina (or Mudgee say) .. to any city in the country, and by car, is half a day of risk minumum, that can be sidestepped by having a pilot do the carrying for you.

Planes get to a lot of places quicker - and you need a lot of cameras to watch 200 baggage handlers -
l
az

[Shari]

bakhir will make a fortune from the sale of the book - he now owns Schappelle Corby Pty Ltd outright

[chrisb]

Mudguts, I once thought the same ie. who would want to smuggle dope into Bali? However I have since discovered that there is a demand for good quality marijuana in Bali from the expat Aussies.

Apparently the Aussie weed is much better than the Bali stuff.

Nevertheless I have my doubts eg. last Saturday's SMH reported that in 1997 a tourist to his horror found some weed in his bags when he unloaded them in his Bali hotel. Interference by baggage handlers was the likely cause.

He called the Australian embassy (confirmed by The embassy) who told him to flush it down the dunny. That didn't work so he just sprinkled it around the hotel's garden!

Very scary as I visited Bali in 1997.

[shish]

Who knows if shes guilty or not. People are forming a view based on overexposed media coverage.

[2. ron bakir has pretty much lost everything by backing corby and has very little to gain.[/quote]

Wanto, this bloke is a shark ! failures elsewhere are the cause for his losses. He is in it purely for the money. He has even registered Schapelle Corby Pty ltd, so his intentions are pretty clear.

[eMpowered]

I was talking to an old balo guy yesterday and he believes she is guilty and has probably been shipping it through for a long time - As others have said their is more to the story and her family that has been reported.

Fact - Bali hooch is home grown - Aussie's import Hydro/Skunk etc much stronger pot.

[zzz]

She would also know (having been to bali many times before) that the customs checks on tourists entering Bali from Australia are usually not very thorough. Probably because there's generally no expectation that australian tourists coming into bali are likely to be smuggling things in. So maybe she was banking on that same logic that is being used to defend her.
(thats not to say I don't think she should be acquitted - I think enough doubt about the whole situation's been raised that she probably should be acquitted. But at the same time I think there's every possibility she's guilty as well).

[willie]

i havn't read the previous posts here as i dont have the time but id just like to remind everyone about the amount of BS that is going on.. i may be incorrect so please feel free to correct me and i apologise for any misunderstandin

But, isn't it true that the guy who was found guilty for the bali bombing, who killed massive amounts of people and injured just as many, was only sentanced to jail for hardly enough time for this deed?? no matter how long it was he stayed alive and in jail..

This other chick from aus on the other hand was found with a plant that grows from the ground created when this earth was, and yet she deserves death?? how does being in possession of a plant deserve death when killing a hell of a lot of ppl gets a shorter jail sentance than deserved??

and why would she be takin the hash over to bali?? it costs wat, twice as much to sell over here in aus?? wheres the logic?

all in all.. i dont care about the sentance she gets.. i just ask wheres the logic?

[zzz]

Amrozi (the bali bomber) was originally sentenced to death. He's appealed once but failed. I think he might still be going through review/appeal processes - a bit like the U.S. - it can take years for the appeal process to be completed and the sentence actually carried out but I'm pretty sure that at the moment he's still facing an execution.

Abu Bakir Bashir, the leader of the islamic group (jemah islamia?sp?) that orchestrated the bombings I think has managed to get himself released somehow - not sure of the details.

[mandoora]

As much as I feel sorry for Chapelle, it is hard to figure out wether that is because of all the media (the only info I have about it fed by the media) or wether it is because the facts dont add up.

Either way I don't agree that it would necessarily be any different had she been caught here in OZ. I mean appart from the obvious difference in sentencing, but quite seriously, lack of finger prints on drugs is hardly an excuse for aquital... if it were every remotely intelligent drug smugler in the world would never go to jail if they were caught. Had she walked through Sydney airport with the same bag, she would be just as likely to be have been arrested and probably would not have got a sceret of media attention, and the law would probably be breathing down her neck just as hard for her to prove that it wasn't hers.

It's a very sad case and I do hope that regardless of the real facts, she does atleast get to come home... be it behind bars or free. (I feel the same way for all the people looking at time or death in 3rd world prisons)

[macca202]

Had she walked through Sydney airport with the same bag, she would be just as likely to be have been arrested and probably would not have got a sceret of media attention, and the law would probably be breathing down her neck just as hard for her to prove that it wasn't hers.

in our legal system, you need to prove that they are guilty, not that they innocent. Unfortunatly, the judge in Bali said a few comments that made it sound like you DO need to prove innocence.

[seahag]

while not saying she is guilty, there is always this http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/The-Ba ... 58469.html