Corrupt Australian Government Sells Innocent Schapelle Corby For Political Expediency

Judging from your posts, the latter.

 

Yes I think you are right my friend, all the years of arguing and debating complete fools has had it's toll and I am slowing up a little.

So what's your excuse?

 

Its NOT about compassion MM, its about owning ones own stuffups and taking the consequences for them.

 

Years of baby sitting idiots with poor impulse control and pathological personality disorders. I was going to say alcohol but thats a consequence of the former.

 

I do not believe there was enough evidence to convict her of the crime.

So it is okay for a TERRORIST to get a reduction?

 

What you believe is irrelevant MAK, the fact is that she WAS found GUILTY and therefore my point stands.

Well he DIDN'T have the mobile phone now did he???

 

She may have broken the rules but why are they treating a terrorist better than someone who committed a victimless crime?

 

Simple thing to answer mate, he is playing by the rules and she is playing peoples heartstrings...

 

Murderers in Australia routinely get lighter sentences than drug traffickers, the Indonesian justice system isnt any different to ours in this way. You are trying to prove she got railroaded, she didnt.
1. Corby got a fair trial
2. She was proven guilty in that trial
3. She got the sentence under law that is attributed to the crime she committed.

The rest is just fairy floss. Grist for the tabloid media mill.

 

Your a fool that just keeps quoting NON-FACTS which are ALWAYS proven wrong so why bother.

1: Her trial was absolutely NOT fair.
2: No, to be proven guilty ALL evidence must be considered, it amuses me as to how many "So Called Law Abiding People" are happy that she was railroaded. If they don't have anything themselves to hide, why on earth would they...
3: Well this just doesn't make sense, attributed to means that punishment is an attribute of crime, well maybe it is for some as businessmen seem to think that crime is an attribute of business. To me though, punishment is a consequence of crime.

If a 19 year old child hangs themself, they have committed a crime, if a middle age businessman shoots himself he has committed a crime, if a 95 year old man with a terminal disease sits in his car with a hose from the exhaust, He has committed a crime.

All crimes as all criminals are not equal

 

If you are out shopping and I slip something into your bag, and you are caught with that item, I take it you would be happy to have been proven guilty of stealing even though you didn't steal a thing?

 

What a crap argument...

 

He got you all squared up didnt he

 

not at all, its not really worth replying to.

 

To those people who continue to harbour the notion that Schapelle Corby must be 'guilty,' because she was 'convicted' in a Bali Court, I ask you to look at the following:

Indonesia is a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 11. * (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

Schapelle was not given all the guarantees necessary for her defence.

She was denied fingerprinting of the plastic bags.

She was denied a weight comparison of her baggage, to determine whether it was 4kg heavier than when checked in.

She was denied forensic testing of the drugs to determine THC content (which would have established the quality of the drugs - bush weed or hydroponic) and country of origin.

She was denied access to the CCTV footage from the camera above the Customs Counter, which could, and would, have corroborated her story about what happened, and what was said, when the boogie-board bag was placed on the counter.

Her own sworn statement and the testimonies of all her witnesses were dismissed.

Not one word of condemning testimony by the prosecution's witnesses was backed up by even a single piece of hard evidence. If it had been the truth, the CCTV footage from the camera above the Custom's Counter would have provided hard evidence. The Chief Judge chose not to allow it into court.

Not a single Judge in the panel of 3 had ever acquitted a defendant, and Chief Judge Linton Sirait had presided over 500 previous drug related trials.

These are indisputable FACTS!

As such, her trial was a sham, and the 'guilty' verdict resulting from it has no credibility.

She was judged guilty, no one is denying this. However, she was not proven guilty, and her basic human right to a fair trial was totally ignored.

The 20 year sentence handed down was one of the highest, if not THE highest, in Indonesian legal history for a marijuana related crime. Hotman Paris Hutapea's legal firm looked into this and could find no former case where a comparable sentence had been handed down.

 

Massive fail, Universal declaration of human rights is not legally binding and there is not one country signatory to it which incorporates all of the declaration into its legal system. I could tear your statement completly apart here on other levels also but this will suffice for now.

So you say, however she was accorded exactly the same rights she would have been afforded under australian law, another fail for you.

Well, what we have here is an outright lie. Corbys legal advice never requested fingerprinting. The truth is that the Bali police did not choose to fingerprint the marijuana, a completely different matter. Despite this, Corbys Lawyer ignored this potential flaw in forensic evidence choosing instead to focus on a completly unbeleivable fabrication about baggage handlers allegedly dropping the dope in her bag.

Again another rmassive fail, mounting up arent they? There was no weight comparison to be had, so this is a lie.

Fail number 5, not doing too good are ya champ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schapelle_Corby

Another lie

Complete fabrication, they didnt beleive her story. Neither do i, or anyone with half a brain cell.

Another lie.

Who knows? Everything else you have stated here is a complete fabrication, cant be bothered checking on this one.

No, they are indisputable lies

No, it wasnt. Sentences of 20 years plus are routine for drug dealers in Indonesia. There is no legal distinction made between crimes involving marijuana and crimes involving other drugs.
Congratulations, I think you just broke the all time record for number of fabrications, falsehoods and outright lies in a single post.

 

Answer the question. This is the most accurate way to describe what happened to Schapelle. Someone put something into her bag and she was accused of a crime.

 

Yep. And sentences of just 15 years are routine for convicted terrorists!

 

Thanks for educating me, Ian, on this one point, however, you are only partially correct, since there are no signatory countries, period, to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.unac.org/rights/question.html).

Indonesia is, however, a signatory to the ‘International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights’ (ICCPR) which embraces the right to a fair trial (article14) (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm). Their own ‘Indonesian Code of Criminal Procedure’ (KUHAP) also embraces this right.

However, you have stated that Schapelle got a fair trial, and I am stating that she didn’t. If the principles of Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were not upheld, which they weren’t, then she did not receive a fair trial, regardless of whether Article 11 is legally binding in Indonesia or not.

Wrong! Under Australian law her legal team would have been entitled to access to the primary evidence, which would have allowed them to get fingerprinting and forensic testing done.

Wrong! Both Schapelle and her legal team requested fingerprinting on a number of occasions, before the ‘trial’ and during the ‘trial’. This included fingerprinting of the inner bag which had not been contaminated by customs officers and police officers, who handled the outer bag without gloves on, when the marijuana was first discovered. Contamination of the inner bag occurred in court, with one of the judges, the prosecutor, and a customs officer touching the bag without gloves on (http://www.expendable.tv/2011/09/mutual-evasion-report.html).

Wrong! The total weight of Schapelle’s checked-in luggage was recorded, so all the customs/police had to do was weigh the same checked-in luggage, with the drugs, immediately. If the weight was the same, then the drugs were in her luggage at check-in - guilty. If the weight was 4.2kg heavier, then the drugs were not in her luggage at check-in - innocent.

Wrong! This article speaks for itself (http://www.expendable.tv/2011/09/mutual-evasion-report.html ).

Wrong! I was referring to the CCTV footage from the camera above the Customs Counter at Ngurah Rai Airport, not Sydney Airport.
As to the fate of all the missing CCTV footage from the 3 Australian airports that Schapelle passed through, Brisbane Domestic, Sydney Domestic and Sydney International, well, that is a question which I, and other supporters, would very much like the answer to.

They chose not to believe her story, even though it was the truth, and chose instead to believe the totally unsupported and uncorroborated lies of the customs officer, Gusti Winata. It was a “He said, She said” situation. She asked for the footage from the camera above the Customs Counter at Ngurah Rai Airport to prove her story (hardly something she would have done if she was lying), yet the prosecution did not request it to prove their witness’s testimony, and give it credibility. Now why is that???

As for people with half a brain cell, it appears that most who believe Schapelle is guilty fall into that category. Either this, or they are just too lazy to do their own independent research, preferring instead to be fed spin by the mainstream media who are managing their opinions very effectively, yet they don’t even realise it. The good news is that a massive amount of research, by an independent research team, is now available on one site: (www.expendable.tv).

Having known Schapelle and her family for over 25 years, I know she is innocent, and everything I have found in my years of research only supports what I know to be true.

No, it is not.

Well, Ian, what I have stated here is NOT complete fabrication. However, due to your lack of knowledge about the case, most of what you have stated IS complete fabrication.

Wrong!

Wrong! Hotman Paris Hutapea's legal firm looked into this and could find no former case where a comparable sentence had been handed down for a similar offence. This is a fact, whether you like it or not.

Not doing too good are ya Ian?

 

Bit strange that after 9/11, we'd have such a lack of security in our own airports!

By the way, Simba, its great to see someone else pushing the 'expendable' project. Hopefully, with enough people on Facebook and around the country, someone will pay attention!

 

More like absolute truth.

The Muslim jihadists who hacked off the heads of the 3 Christian schoolgirls only got 14 years.
No death sentence, note.

Two Muslim brothers caught trying to smuggle 8 kgs of marijuana thru Jakarta airport, ...one got 5 years, the other 6 years.

The killer of Aussie girl Heidi Murphy in her Bali villa, stabbed dozens of times...only got 15 years.
No death sentence, note.

There's a whole list of sentences for smuggling thousands of pills on person etc where the sentences were nothing like that of White, western, Christian, flower of Australian womanhood Schapelle.


http://www.australian-news.com.au/Corby.htm

The hypocrisy, prejudice and corruption of the Indonesian legal system was glaringly highlighted on Friday 27 May 2005 when three Indonesian judges sitting in a crowded Bali courthouse found 27-year-old Australian tourist Schapelle Corby guilty of possessing 4.1 kg of marihuana, sentencing her to 20 years in a stinking, overcrowded, rat-infested jail.


In the barbaric conditions of an Indonesian jail, this was tantamount to a death sentence. Most long-term prisoners are dead within ten years of being locked up. Without food and medicine supplied by family and friends, Corby's life expectancy in jail will be short.

Corby was never going to get a fair trial. Barely able to conceal his racist glee in putting a white woman in her place, .........


While Schapelle Corby got twenty years jail, and may still face a firing squad, Abu Bakir Bashir, one of the masterminds of the Bali bombing atrocity that claimed 202 lives got a mere 30 months jail.

 

Please don't confuse the argument with facts

 

Corby haters hate it when they are presented with the facts! There is NOTHING they can say that justifies poor Schapelle being treated so poorly while the terrorists are treated like royalty!

 

yes there is. She was CONVICTED of a CRIME and therefore must take whats coming to her for it.

 

That is nothing more than a fantasy theory put forward to try get her out of the mess she got HERSELF into.