NationStates Jolt Archive

To begin with, I withdraw all my comments I might of made about the case, now I am uncertain about whether she is guilty or not. The problem with the case which makes me doubt her innocence is the fact that what we hear on the case is all one sided, we have hardly heard anything from the prosecution's side. The media wants us to feel sympathy, that is the whole purpose of this, there was no injustice done. Schapelle Corby has been tried by law (by three judges) and found guilty, to be honest it shouldn't be on the news at all.
There are hundreds of Australians over seas in jail, possibly for the wrong reasons, and they don't get on the news. So why does Corby make it? She's is young, beutiful (easy to feel sympathy for) and most importantly, it was in Indonesia. Ever since the Bali bombings Australian's have feared to set foot in Bali, why shouldn't the media twist it into hatred? All it took was a few pityful words and pictures of Corby crying to turn the ever-believing TV watches against Indonesia all for TV ratings. Yes, they told us the truth but not the whole truth, does it matter that she knew what was in the bag before they opened it? No, because you only hear little of that kind of stuff, we don't want to hear arguments against our very own Schapelle Corby.
Next time you open your mouth consider what you havn't been told, maybe the press is wrong and maybe she is guilty. All I'm asking is for fellow Australian's to not be so simple minded in what you see on the news, especially ch. 7, 10 and 9. But of course, it's in the news, they won't let something wrong get put in the news. Would they?

To begin with, I withdraw all my comments I might of made about the case, now I am uncertain about whether she is guilty or not. The problem with the case which makes me doubt her innocence is the fact that what we hear on the case is all one sided, we have hardly heard anything from the prosecution's side. The media wants us to feel sympathy, that is the whole purpose of this, there was no injustice done. Schapelle Corby has been tried by law (by three judges) and found guilty, to be honest it shouldn't be on the news at all.
There are hundreds of Australians over seas in jail, possibly for the wrong reasons, and they don't get on the news. So why does Corby make it? She's is young, beutiful (easy to feel sympathy for) and most importantly, it was in Indonesia. Ever since the Bali bombings Australian's have feared to set foot in Bali, why shouldn't the media twist it into hatred? All it took was a few pityful words and pictures of Corby crying to turn the ever-believing TV watches against Indonesia all for TV ratings. Yes, they told us the truth but not the whole truth, does it matter that she knew what was in the bag before they opened it? No, because you only hear little of that kind of stuff, we don't want to hear arguments against our very own Schapelle Corby.
Next time you open your mouth consider what you havn't been told, maybe the press is wrong and maybe she is guilty. All I'm asking is for fellow Australian's to not be so simple minded in what you see on the news, especially ch. 7, 10 and 9. But of course, it's in the news, they won't let something wrong get put in the news. Would they?

*applause*

*applause*

About time, I thought this thread was going to be immediatly dead.

About time, I thought this thread was going to be immediatly dead.

Maybe I spoke too soon, come on people.

I probably should have put her full name in the title.

Though I've been out of the country and haven't heard it all, I think this sould be stiring more debate than it is...

Well, from the outside looking in on this issue, as a Canadian, I do have ONE REALLLY IMPORTANT QUESTION for all you Aussies: Is she really stupid enough not to have noticed 4.5 Kilos of Weed somehow finding it way to her luggage. Or have not noticed the extra nine pounds of weight in her BackPack? No matter how weak or strong your are, 4.5 kilos is a big enough difference in weight to be noticed.

So is she really that bloody stupid or is it an act? If she really is that stupid, she's most certainly innocent.

Well, from the outside looking in on this issue, as a Canadian, I do have ONE REALLLY IMPORTANT QUESTION for all you Aussies: Is she really stupid enough not to have noticed 4.5 Kilos of Weed somehow finding it way to her luggage. Or have not noticed the extra nine pounds of weight in her BackPack? No matter how weak or strong your are, 4.5 kilos is a big enough difference in weight to be noticed.

So is she really that bloody stupid or is it an act? If she really is that stupid, she's most certainly innocent.

That may be true, but why on earth would you smuggle marijuana from Australia to Indonesia? Where is the profit incentive?!?

I take issue with the beautiful bit. She's okay, but not that hot.

Media Watch on the ABC did some good segments about the media and Corby.
link (http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1374687.htm) link (http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1374685.htm)

Well, from the outside looking in on this issue, as a Canadian, I do have ONE REALLLY IMPORTANT QUESTION for all you Aussies: Is she really stupid enough not to have noticed 4.5 Kilos of Weed somehow finding it way to her luggage. Or have not noticed the extra nine pounds of weight in her BackPack? No matter how weak or strong your are, 4.5 kilos is a big enough difference in weight to be noticed.

So is she really that bloody stupid or is it an act? If she really is that stupid, she's most certainly innocent.

Before she opened her bag she admitted she had marijuana in her bag. Interesting fact.

P.S can't be bothered quoting that other reply so I'll include the reply in here: Someone said that it makes no sense for us to be smuggling marijuana into Indonesia, but the Bali Nine did it didn't they? And even if they were framed it is obvious someone wants the drugs in Indonesia.

Did they do a Trial of the Century of the Week like we do in the US (God how I hate it)? One would think that if it's an open legal process, the truth would make itself known irrespective of the verdict, and if it's not, Indonesia deserves the criticism it's getting, though perhaps for a different reason. But it could have turned out worse for her, she could have been run over by a bulldozer.

Did they do a Trial of the Century of the Week like we do in the US (God how I hate it)? One would think that if it's an open legal process, the truth would make itself known irrespective of the verdict, and if it's not, Indonesia deserves the criticism it's getting, though perhaps for a different reason. But it could have turned out worse for her, she could have been run over by a bulldozer.

They don't have to have the same legal process as the american's do. By entering their country she should have made herself aware of Indonesia's strict laws. She was tried and found guilty, not by one but three judges.

By keeping secrets, particularly non-sensical ones they invite mistrust. Deservedly so.

*More applause*
This is what I've been saying and more Australians are hearing it too.

But Bali Nine were trying to smuggle drugs out.

So why smuggle drugs in?

Lets hypothesis.

Lets say certain members of your family live in Bali. Lets say these members had a history of using. Would they want to buy from local suppliers? No, especially when there aren't intrapment laws. But a relative might bring some over. It could explain several trips a year.

Not to imply anything...but its far more plausible than flying it from Melbourne to Sydney, which sounds like a bizarre act.

That may be true, but why on earth would you smuggle marijuana from Australia to Indonesia? Where is the profit incentive?!?

They sell predominantly to foreign tourists at prices like that in Australia, who have developed caution against buying locally. Despite the lower cost, there are many 'duds' (where its not real marijiana) or the vendors are either part of a police sting operation or police informers.

The vendors can make a tidy profit from any currency fluctuations involved as well.

Indonesia has poorer quality drugs to australian drugs so there would be a small market for the australian grown ones. Oh and I'd like to add for those who think a death sentance is too harsh, think about their world. They need to discourage drug trafficing in Indonesia and the best way they can do that is by making examples of any drug smuggler entering their country. If they had no death sentence their drug problems would be sky high right this moment. The Indonesian government is not cruel, they just do what they believe is best for their country.

They sell predominantly to foreign tourists at prices like that in Australia, who have developed caution against buying locally. Despite the lower cost, there are many 'duds' (where its not real marijiana) or the vendors are either part of a police sting operation or police informers.

The vendors can make a tidy profit from any currency fluctuations involved as well.

Fair enough.

The Indonesian government is not cruel, they just do what they believe is best for their country.

Like, for instance, sentencing a terrorist mastermind to 2 years in prison.

I still think that the media is causing a lot of harm by making people boycott Indonesia, all they did was follow their laws.

Personally I think those people who are trying to get a 'refund' from their Tsunami donations are disgusting.

The Indonesian government is not cruel, they just do what they believe is best for their country.Like, for instance, sentencing a terrorist mastermind to 2 years in prison.

and 'disappearing' people who once knew a guy who might have thought west papua or aceh should be independent

I agree you never see the other side of it

Personally I think those people who are trying to get a 'refund' from their Tsunami donations are disgusting.

Yeah. But you can see where they are coming from. Personally I don't think she (Corby) got a fair go. The one time Australia asks Indonesia to be reasonable...

And a fair trial is not reasonable? The onus is on her after all to prove that she did not own or knowingly brought said drugs into the country. And if you use the argument that she could not be that stupid, I suggest you look up the darwin awards. You would be surprised at the sheer level of 'stupid' these people exuded before winning their awards.

And a fair trial is not reasonable? The onus is on her after all to prove that she did not own or knowingly brought said drugs into the country. And if you use the argument that she could not be that stupid, I suggest you look up the darwin awards. You would be surprised at the sheer level of 'stupid' these people exuded before winning their awards.
Fair is in the eye of the beholder, and if it's secret, there aren't a lot of interested 3rd parties beholding. As for the onus of who proving what, well that varies widely from country to country. And that's certainly something to consider when making travel plans. Even if one isn't planning on doing something one shouldn't be doing, understanding what rights you have or don't have is an important consideration when traveling to a local where traveling can entail great risk to one's cherished freedoms.

Like, for instance, sentencing a terrorist mastermind to 2 years in prison.

Oh boy, I thought media watch (if no one else) had pointed it out:
Abu Bakar Bashir was not convicted! He is therefore innocent before the law, whether you like it or not.
The People who were convicted are sitting on Death Row. They were bloody well sent there by the very same judge.
--------------
On a different note:
Now with Australians engaging in "terrorist" behaviour, ie sending white powders, should Indonesia engage in preemptive strikes against targets in Australia?

Yes Kibolonia, when making travel plans while smuggling drugs, it is important to make sure the customs are suitably bribed first or have a means of transporting the materials without being caught.

Besides, isn't the usual punishment for felonies the surrendering of rights? Such as the right to free movement when you spend time in jail. I believe that it is a common factor throughout the world.

Truly innocent, truly guilty, the matter is moot. None of us can prove either truly, but the courts have decided that what was proven is sufficient to convict.

and 'disappearing' people who once knew a guy who might have thought west papua or aceh should be independent

Or East Timor.

Oh boy, I thought media watch (if no one else) had pointed it out:
Abu Bakar Bashir was not convicted! He is therefore innocent before the law, whether you like it or not.
The People who were convicted are sitting on Death Row. They were bloody well sent there by the very same judge.
--------------

I have my suspicions, then. Perhaps we wasn't truly convicted because the judges fear him?

On a different note:
Now with Australians engaging in "terrorist" behaviour, ie sending white powders, should Indonesia engage in preemptive strikes against targets in Australia?

Definitely. It would eliminate quite a few morons that think that sort of thing is funny. ;)

Yes Kibolonia, when making travel plans while smuggling drugs, it is important to make sure the customs are suitably bribed first or have a means of transporting the materials without being caught.
Even while not smuggeling drugs. Look at all the people mistakenly convicted in US courts. You think the legal systems of other poorly educated countries are more trustworthy because they use an abridged version of the personal freedoms handbook? Their process is closed because they know they'll frequently get the wrong person, but they don't care, the appearence of propreity is more important that actual effectiveness. And if it costs a few people their lives, think big picture. Whether or not Corby is acctually guilty isn't dependent on the trustworthiness of their legal system. And if their system isn't open and verifibly honest, it's a hidden variable.

I have my suspicions, then. Perhaps we wasn't truly convicted because the judges fear him?

Being not an Australian, but living here for near on four years, I am continuously surprised by the underlying xenophobia in this multicultural country.
One day Indonesia is being accused of being a ruthless police state in which dissent is impossible, the next it's a sesspool of Islamic fundamentalism, with a powerless government being bullied into submission.
And underlying this entire Corby debate is the generally accepted belief that the Indonesians ("monkeys" according to some radio people) cannot sort their own affairs. They couldn't run a proper court even if they tried.
Point is, no Australian court would have set Corby free. There was zero media attention devote to the prosecution's case here, but hundreds of stories about the defence case. The media deliberatly created a picture of some sort of irrefutable defense that no one could possibly defeat.
Had they just spend half the time they were on TV actually preparing a good case and gathering evidence, they might have had a chance.
Now all they did was break down in court and start crying (not only Corby, but her lawyers too)

There has been a lot of attention given to the Corby case, but not so much to the case of a Japanese woman who has been locked up in an Australian gaol for the past 10 years for a similar crime that she maintains she is innocent of. Some of the injustices that have occurred in her case include not having an adequate interpretor and being tried with 2 alledged accomplices rather than separately even though the prosecution could provide no evidence that the 3 even knew each other prior to being arrested.
Australians should look to their own criminal justice system before criticising others.
And as one prominant Australian lawyer noted, she got the trial she paid for, just as she would have in Australia. Those who think she is innocent would be better off ensuring she has the best legal representation rather than asking for their tsunami donations back.

And a fair trial is not reasonable? The onus is on her after all to prove that she did not own or knowingly brought said drugs into the country. And if you use the argument that she could not be that stupid, I suggest you look up the darwin awards. You would be surprised at the sheer level of 'stupid' these people exuded before winning their awards.

It's actually the other way round, hence the appeal to the Indonesian Constitutional Court.

Even while not smuggeling drugs. Look at all the people mistakenly convicted in US courts. You think the legal systems of other poorly educated countries are more trustworthy because they use an abridged version of the personal freedoms handbook? Their process is closed because they know they'll frequently get the wrong person, but they don't care, the appearence of propreity is more important that actual effectiveness. And if it costs a few people their lives, think big picture. Whether or not Corby is acctually guilty isn't dependent on the trustworthiness of their legal system. And if their system isn't open and verifibly honest, it's a hidden variable.

Given the recent highlighting of the case of said japanese woman (unverified as I have not checked), but entirely possible, one wonders about the system where you live in. Going by what you say, then the best place to be would be one without courts. After all, has there ever been a nation where no court ever wrongly convicted someone?


It's actually the other way round, hence the appeal to the Indonesian Constitutional Court.

The appeal to lessen the sentence or are you speaking of another one?

Or did you mean that it was up to the prosecution to prove the drugs were hers? If so, they have done so to a level that is acceptable to the courts I believe.

You will have to clarify.

To be honest i hope shes guilty (hear me out) because if shes not. Well shes got 20 years for something she didnt do, but if she did well she got justice served to her.Now im not all happy i mean escpecially with how much of a sentence the bali bomber conspiriter guy got 3 years for masterminding the death of 209 people and corby got 20 years for 4.1kg of marijuhana is a bit odd but if she did it she knew what would happen if she didnt then she deserves our sypmpathies.

To be honest i hope shes guilty (hear me out) because if shes not. Well shes got 20 years for something she didnt do, but if she did well she got justice served to her.Now im not all happy i mean escpecially with how much of a sentence the bali bomber conspiriter guy got 3 years for masterminding the death of 209 people and corby got 20 years for 4.1kg of marijuhana is a bit odd but if she did it she knew what would happen if she didnt then she deserves our sypmpathies.

see my earlier post concerning abu bakar bashir.

What really annoys me is all the people complaining that the Australian government hasn't done enough, they either don't know or don't care that the Australian government can't do anything, and also when they complain it was unfair, the indonesian judges did things that they probably wouldn't let them do in Australia, like flying over that prisoner from Australia.

see my earlier post concerning abu bakar bashir.

wow i actually didnt know he wasnt convicted. well thats kind of odd, does that mean they found him innocent beacuase that would have been pretty hard to do, i mean isnt he the guy who like confessed to it.

wow i actually didnt know he wasnt convicted. well thats kind of odd, does that mean they found him innocent beacuase that would have been pretty hard to do, i mean isnt he the guy who like confessed to it.

Abu Bakar Bashir is a cleric (admittedly radical), who is being accused of being the spiritual leader of a group affiliated with Al Qaeda in Indonesia.
He says this group doesn't exist and that the accusations are fabricated by the US to suppress Islam.
When this group then commited the Bali Bombing, a number of people were arrested, including the people who built the bomb, detonated it and organised the attack. All of those people are now on death row, sent there by the same judge who sent Corby to jail.
Abu Bakar Bashir was then arrested as the accused leader of this group, and the charges against him were quite severe. In the end, his very skilled defence team managed to demolish all but a few minor charges against him. Because of those minor charges he is now in jail for two years or something.
Since he has not been convicted and proven to be the leader of (or affiliated with) Jemaah Islamyah, he is innocent before the law.
------
Without wanting to sound elitist, if you hadn't heard of that you should probably watch the news on SBS more regularly. They are really good news, everyday on 6:30pm and 9:30pm on SBS.

Given the recent highlighting of the case of said japanese woman (unverified as I have not checked), but entirely possible, one wonders about the system where you live in. Going by what you say, then the best place to be would be one without courts. After all, has there ever been a nation where no court ever wrongly convicted someone?



The appeal to lessen the sentence or are you speaking of another one?

Or did you mean that it was up to the prosecution to prove the drugs were hers? If so, they have done so to a level that is acceptable to the courts I believe.

You will have to clarify.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200505/s1379553.htm

Ah, you mean the appeal of innocent until the proof of guilt? Legally speaking, you could get away with it. But legally speaking, perhaps it is because no conclusive evidence could be provided by the defence that would have cleared the matter? If so, then the prosecution has an easier time gaining a guilty verdict. That is after all, what the prosecution is for. Unless legal affairs have significantly changed when I was not looking, the purpose of the prosecution is to gain a guilty verdict while the defense does otherwise.

And yesterday, an Australian citizen was sentenced to death by firing squad in Vietnam for Heroin Smuggling. Length of Trial: One day.
We hear next to nothing.
The difference: This True-Blue Aussie Battler was born in Vietnam, and therefore doesn't count as real Australian.

And you tell me this whole thing isn't built on racism.

Actually it was built on media ratings. Whatever sells to the public, they will display it. The media learned a long time ago that stoking the emotions is the best way of getting increased ratings.