Schapelle

[JoondalupJ]

There are some good points here. But a mate at work has a mate whos daughter was good friends with the Corby's. She's been drug trafficking dope to Bali for years. I couldn't tell you much more than what's known publicly, but yeah. She's as guilty as f*ck.

It got me thinking about the whole thing today as well.

I'm thinking she was either tipped off about smuggling drugs into the country or she was geniunely set up by Mercedes. But would you really cover up for your own sister if they got you a 20 year prison sentence? Unlikely.

I think the likely scenario is that the Corby's paid off a few employee's to let the drugs through Bali airport into the country but were tipped off. The reason she immediately claimed ownership of the bag could be down to the fact she wouldn't have known about being tipped off and/or the wrong person got hold of the bag containing the weed.

I heard the x-ray machines at Brisbane airport were down the day they smuggled the drugs and when asked later on why a bag of dope managed to sneak past any checks someone said the staff there can be lazy at times. Shouldn't they be sacked then for not doing their job? Or are they covering their own asses by using that as an excuse so they don't expose any drug smugglers at the Brisbane airport?

Don't get me wrong, i haven't seen the doco, but am only going by what the mate at work told me. But he certainly knows she's guilty for drug smuggling, hell, the whole family was involved in drugs apparently, and if you wanted drugs in that area the only people you would go and see were the Corby's.

I don't have any sympathy for someone who took the whole of Australia for a ride in trying to convince everyone she was innocent. She can rot in the hell hole for all i care.

How would you know, its hear say. My uncle's second cousin's brother's best friends daughter's mother in law knows a bloke who swears that his father is Elvis !

 

[sausageroll]

Gee mate they have to prove her guilt not the other way around.Beyond reasonable doubt, and, it was beyond reasonable doubt. Two reasons, She'd told them, yes the bags are mine the dope is not,there is the first doubt that a prosicutor (in this country
anyway) would have to investigate .Secondly the bloody Indonesians did not investigate hardly anything, and they destroyed the dope as well, too soon. Their system had her hung drawn and quartered before her feet touched the police station floor.
Its like if you lived in a street that was a mile long and someone was murdered at the other end, shot dead,so the cops search every house in the street .You live at the extreme other end but your the only person with a rifle say?Well mate you've got the gun we,ve found it, IT MUST BE YOU.We don't need any more investigating, String him up! No No no one else could have done it, dead body, gun shot and gun, its you.

Your example is wrong.
She was caught ON THE SPOT with drugs in her possession. For your example to be accurate the person with the gun would have to be there on the spot with the gun in their hand like Corby was with the drugs.
Or maybe customs got a tip off that there were drugs in a boogie board bag, went to where Corby was staying, found her bag and said well Schapelle you've got the boogie board bag we've found it, IT MUST BE YOU. We don't need any more investigating, string her up! No No no one else could have done it, tipoff of drugs in boogie board bag and boogie board bag, it's you. But that's obviously not what happened.

Your comparison was pretty poor!
She was caught in possession of drugs.
She now has the responsibility of proving they weren't hers. She couldn't prove it so she was found guilty.

If she wasn't found guilty anyone would be able to smuggle drugs and get away with it by saying they weren't theirs. How can customs possibly prove that they're lying? No-one would EVER be found guilty!

The only problem I have with the case is the fact that there was no video surveillance when she was caught. The finger prints and testing should have been done too but I don't think it would have proven anything either way unless Corby's fingerprints were on the bag. Lack of fingerprints or even someone else's prints could just mean Corby wore gloves! And testing for the source of the drugs would also mean nothing as they could have been transported from anywhere in Australia before they were send to Bali.

The result was correct given the circumstances.

 

[the_fresh]

Under the Australian court system she would have got off.
There were too many f*** ups for it to hold up in a court. But she wasn't tried here.

IMO she knew or someone in her family knew.

 

[sausageroll]

I agree, but this is about justice being done, not the drugs, if you are absolutely totally guilty then you get it hard, but no one proved her guilty beyond any doubt at all did they?

No, but she was caught in possession of the drugs in her own boogie board bag. They can't just assume that they weren't hers. They have to assume that they WERE hers.

It's up to the defense to prove that they weren't hers in this case. You can't be caught with drugs and just say they're not yours and get off just like that.

Let me say it again... SHE WAS CAUGHT WITH THE DRUGS IN HER POSSESSIONS. In case you still don't understand go back and read the sentence in capitals again. And again and again if you need to.
If drugs are found in your possession in an international airport (or anywhere else for that matter) you're in trouble.

Haha
I'm just imagining the defense...
"OMG. Look at all those drugs in my bag. Wow officer, I don't know how they got there. They're not mine... promise!! You believe me don't you?!? Maybe it was those pesky baggage handlers in Australia. Or maybe it was... oh, nah, I can't think of anything else but you know, it wasn't me. Hope my best friend doesn't dob me in. If she does we'll have to sue her. So... innocent then??? Great, I'll be on my way. Thankyou so much, enjoy your day"

 

[Niximus]

Gee mate they have to prove her guilt not the other way around.Beyond reasonable doubt, and, it was beyond reasonable doubt. Two reasons, She'd told them, yes the bags are mine the dope is not,there is the first doubt that a prosicutor (in this country
anyway) would have to investigate .

Yeah, we should let off everyone who claims they are innocent. If they claim it it must put a doubt in your mind.......

Secondly the bloody Indonesians did not investigate hardly anything,

huh?

and they destroyed the dope as well, too soon. Their system had her hung drawn and quartered before her feet touched the police station floor.Its like if you lived in a street that was a mile long and someone was murdered at the other end, shot dead,so the cops search every house in the street .You live at the extreme other end but your the only person with a rifle say?Well mate you've got the gun we,ve found it, IT MUST BE YOU.We don't need any more investigating, String him up! No No no one else could have done it, dead body, gun shot and gun, its you.

Hardly, it was her bag, the dope was in it. The only explanation she could come up with was the baggage handlers one which has now been exposed as a blatant lie.

The burden of proof is not always on the prosecution, even in our system. If you would like to claim a specific defence (mental incapacity, self-defence etc) the burden is on you to prove it not the prosecution to disprove. Also here if you are caught with a certain amount of dope you are charged with posession, over that amount and it is posession for sale. It is presumed that it is going to be for sale due to the amount you have, they don't have to prove you intended to sell it, you have to prove you didn't.

 

[BomberGal]

When I was younger I thought she was innocent - I think it was me who was the innocent one - but the more I see now, the more I think she's guilty.

Still think 20 years is far too harsh though.

 

[Ed_Gein]

When I was younger I thought she was innocent - I think it was me who was the innocent one - but the more I see now, the more I think she's guilty.

Still think 20 years is far too harsh though.

The way i see it, she knew the risks she was taking and the potential length of jail term if caught. I guess it didn't worry her at the time, so why would it worry her now she's carrying out that sentence?

 

[BomberGal]

The way i see it, she knew the risks she was taking and the potential length of jail term if caught. I guess it didn't worry her at the time, so why would it worry her now she's carrying out that sentence?

No, I don't mean she doesn't deserve it on the basis of ignorance of the consequences or something.

I just don't think the crime justifies the sentence.

 

[sausageroll]

No, I don't mean she doesn't deserve it on the basis of ignorance of the consequences or something.

I just don't think the crime justifies the sentence.

If you want to stop something from happening you've got to impose tough penalties. This is what they've done and they have every right to do it.

People know that if they want to smuggle drugs into the country they're taking a big risk. Some people obviously still think it's worth the risk despite the huge penalties. Some people are obviously very desperate and/or very stupid.

 

[BomberGal]

If you want to stop something from happening you've got to impose tough penalties. This is what they've done and they have every right to do it.

People know that if they want to smuggle drugs into the country they're taking a big risk. Some people obviously still think it's worth the risk despite the huge penalties. Some people are obviously very desperate and/or very stupid.

Err, yeah.

A country has the right to set its own laws.

That doesn't necessarily make something humane. I could think of better things to give 20 year sentences for.

 

[shiva25]

Err, yeah.

A country has the right to set its own laws.

That doesn't necessarily make something humane. I could think of better things to give 20 year sentences for.

20 years is a fair and decent enough sentence for drug trafficking in my book.What dont you understand about the fact that the more drugs there is out on the street the more risk there is of people dying from using it.Youve obviously not lost someone close from drug use to understand the real implecations of it

 

[sausageroll]

Err, yeah.

A country has the right to set its own laws.

That doesn't necessarily make something humane. I could think of better things to give 20 year sentences for.

Imposing tough penalties for drug trafficing isn't exactly inhumane. It's more inhumane to let drugs flow freely and have a serious drug problem in their community.

So you think 20 years is too much for the crime?
Great!! Exactly the way it should be

Hopefully everyone else feels the same way as you. Maybe then idiots won't risk 20 years or even the death sentence to smuggle drugs into the country and Indonesia will achieve their goal of having no drugs on their streets. Good to see you understand how that works

 

[BomberGal]

Imposing tough penalties for drug trafficing isn't exactly inhumane. It's more inhumane to let drugs flow freely and have a serious drug problem in their community.

So you think 20 years is too much for the crime?
Great!! Exactly the way it should be

Hopefully everyone else feels the same way as you. Maybe then idiots won't risk 20 years or even the death sentence to smuggle drugs into the country and Indonesia will achieve their goal of having no drugs on their streets. Good to see you understand how that works

When they won't sentence people who commit terrible crimes like the Bali bombings, then yes, 20 years is too much.

Deterrence is one thing, but locking people up for an excessive time just to set examples is not how human rights work.

Especially when the conditions in their prisons are inhumane.

BTW here's a little stat for you: Norway's longest prison sentence is 21 years and they have the lowest murder rate in the world.

FWIW, I don't believe in life sentencing except for the most heinous of crimes (say, mass murder), so take that as you will.

 

[shiva25]

When they won't sentence people who commit terrible crimes like the Bali bombings, then yes, 20 years is too much.

Deterrence is one thing, but locking people up for an excessive time just to set examples is not how human rights work.

Especially when the conditions in their prisons are inhumane.

BTW here's a little stat for you: Norway's longest prison sentence is 21 years and they have the lowest murder rate in the world.

FWIW, I don't believe in life sentencing except for the most heinous of crimes (say, mass murder), so take that as you will.

You seem to be missing the point.Drug trafficking can lead to people dying so in a sense people who drug traffick are actually contibuting to peoples death.Thats why the penalties are so high and these scum deserve to be in prisons under inhumane conditions and i cant see how Norways prison sentences can relate to anything we are talking about here
Lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime but if the sentences are harsh it will make people think twice about committing crimes

 

[TOA.]

I know someone involved with the Australian federal police and he (and everyone he knows, including people in Indonesia) is 100% certain she is guilty. Doesnt mean much but just thought I would pass it on.

 

[BomberGal]

You seem to be missing the point.Drug trafficking can lead to people dying so in a sense people who drug traffick are actually contibuting to peoples death.Thats why the penalties are so high and these scum deserve to be in prisons under inhumane conditions

You seem to miss the point that I don't agree 20 years is reasonable for a bag of marijuana (come on, it's not heroin), when worse crimes there get less.

And nobody, not any criminal, deserves to be locked in inhumane conditions. Heard of the UN?

and i cant see how Norways prison sentences can relate to anything we are talking about here
Lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime but if the sentences are harsh it will make people think twice about committing crimes

I find it absolutely hilarious that I just told you that statistic about Norway and STRAIGHTAWAY you followed your dismissal of the Norway statistic with "lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime". Did you just ignore completely what I told you about the lighter sentencing in Norway?

 

[sausageroll]

When they won't sentence people who commit terrible crimes like the Bali bombings, then yes, 20 years is too much.

Deterrence is one thing, but locking people up for an excessive time just to set examples is not how human rights work.

Especially when the conditions in their prisons are inhumane.

BTW here's a little stat for you: Norway's longest prison sentence is 21 years and they have the lowest murder rate in the world.

FWIW, I don't believe in life sentencing except for the most heinous of crimes (say, mass murder), so take that as you will.

1) This highlights that the Bali bombers should definitely have been given tougher penalties, not that drug trafficers should have weaker penalties.

2) Penalising drug trafficers is not unfair or inhumane. People have the right NOT to traffic drugs. If they choose to risk getting caught they're choosing to face the penalties in place.

You seem to be missing the point.Drug trafficking can lead to people dying so in a sense people who drug traffick are actually contibuting to peoples death.Thats why the penalties are so high and these scum deserve to be in prisons under inhumane conditions and i cant see how Norways prison sentences can relate to anything we are talking about here
Lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime but if the sentences are harsh it will make people think twice about committing crimes

Exactly

 

[shiva25]

You seem to miss the point that I don't agree 20 years is reasonable for a bag of marijuana (come on, it's not heroin), when worse crimes there get less.

And nobody, not any criminal, deserves to be locked in inhumane conditions. Heard of the UN?



I find it absolutely hilarious that I just told you that statistic about Norway and STRAIGHTAWAY you followed your dismissal of the Norway statistic with "lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime". Did you just ignore completely what I told you about the lighter sentencing in Norway?

Regardless of the fact that its not heroin it is a drug that many people still die from so it should be treated seriously.
Yes i did ignore your comments about lighter sentencing in Norway because they are ridiculous.If these statistitcs are so true then why dont we have lighter sentences around for the rest of the world? Because it just doesnt work and harsher sentences will always make someone think twice about doing a crime.Thats why they are in place.
Drug trafficking here in Victoria is common on virtually every street because people who get caught know they are going to get a slap on the wrist however in Indonesia you wont find anyone trafficking drugs at anywhere near the same rate as they do here.The reason for that is that tougher laws stop people from doing it so your arguement on the Norway issue just doesnt stack up

 

[BomberGal]

Regardless of the fact that its not heroin it is a drug that many people still die from so it should be treated seriously.
Yes i did ignore your comments about lighter sentencing in Norway because they are ridiculous.If these statistitcs are so true then why dont we have lighter sentences around for the rest of the world? Because it just doesnt work and harsher sentences will always make someone think twice about doing a crime.Thats why they are in place.
Drug trafficking here in Victoria is common on virtually every street because people who get caught know they are going to get a slap on the wrist however in Indonesia you wont find anyone trafficking drugs at anywhere near the same rate as they do here.The reason for that is that tougher laws stop people from doing it so your arguement on the Norway issue just doesnt stack up

Because the rest of the world is too afraid of America who are too afraid of socialism.

Norway is a perfect example of how it can work, but hey, choose to ignore that so you can continue on in your little "drugs are sent from Satan" world.

BTW, last time I checked, drugs are rife all throughout Asia - even with tougher penalties. And hey check out America's murder rates - and they have the death penalty for murder.

 

[shiva25]

Because the rest of the world is too afraid of America who are too afraid of socialism.

Norway is a perfect example of how it can work, but hey, choose to ignore that so you can continue on in your little "drugs are sent from Satan" world.

BTW, last time I checked, drugs are rife all throughout Asia - even with tougher penalties. And hey check out America's murder rates - and they have the death penalty for murder.

Care to explain to me then why it works in Norway and not anywhere else?.If it was that successful in Norway every country would adopt it but the true reality is because it doesnt work.Do you think if America adopted a lighter sentence policy there would be less crime? Doubt it very much.Youve still ignored the fact that people die from drug use every day yet you dont think trafficking is worth the penalties imposed.

 

[Sportman1987]

You seem to be missing the point.Drug trafficking can lead to people dying so in a sense people who drug traffick are actually contibuting to peoples death.Thats why the penalties are so high and these scum deserve to be in prisons under inhumane conditions and i cant see how Norways prison sentences can relate to anything we are talking about here
Lighter sentencing actually encourages more crime but if the sentences are harsh it will make people think twice about committing crimes

Pretty rich logic. Noone is forced to consume drugs. And how many cases of marijuana deaths are you aware of?

 

[TigerCleavage]

I'm very certain that she's guilty, the way she presents her argument and the way her family behaves is very dodgy. They seem to be very keen to do interviews and walk down media street, but they always dodge and weave all the questions and when one of them is put in a position they don't like they get very attackful (if that's a word).
The whole thing reeks of bullsh1t to me. They actually come off as very scary in my eyes and their family seems more like an organization rather than a family.
Somethings off with them, very off.

 

[shiva25]

Pretty rich logic. Noone is forced to consume drugs. And how many cases of marijuana deaths are you aware of?

Your right No one is forced to take drugs but the less there are out on the street the less chance there is of people taking them.There may not be as many deaths with people taking marijuana as there is with more illicit drugs but there are still people that die from it not to mention how many people actually get addicted to the stuff and ruin their lives in the process.Its a far greater problem than you may think

 

[BomberGal]

Care to explain to me then why it works in Norway and not anywhere else?.If it was that successful in Norway every country would adopt it but the true reality is because it doesnt work.Do you think if America adopted a lighter sentence policy there would be less crime? Doubt it very much.Youve still ignored the fact that people die from drug use every day yet you dont think trafficking is worth the penalties imposed.

And you continue to ignore the fact that people don't die from using marijuana anymore than from cigarettes.

I don't think a bag of pot is worth 20 years. I didn't say drug trafficking isn't worth time in jail.

You say "the true reality is because it doesn't work" but it does work in Norway. Other countries are too scared to try it and THAT'S why we don't see it working there - they don't implement it in the first place! And they aren't willing to put in the effort to bother with rehabilitation (which is what the focus lies on in Norway). Scandinavian countries set great examples for a lot of things, but other countries won't try them. Why? Pride, arrogance, fear, effort. America is afraid of socialism so they won't rehabilitate and Asian countries are afraid of the west so they lock up these influences.

Evidently harsher penalties aren't working in Asia for drugs, and in America for murder. People have an "it won't happen to me" attitude, and while that lasts, making examples of people will never work. Criminals are not afraid of prison time or they wouldn't commit the crimes in the first place. 20 years is a long, long time. Schapelle knew that, and yet (if she did it), she did it anyway.

 

[sausageroll]

And you continue to ignore the fact that people don't die from using marijuana anymore than from cigarettes.

I don't think a bag of pot is worth 20 years. I didn't say drug trafficking isn't worth time in jail.

You say "the true reality is because it doesn't work" but it does work in Norway. Other countries are too scared to try it and THAT'S why we don't see it working there - they don't implement it in the first place! And they aren't willing to put in the effort to bother with rehabilitation (which is what the focus lies on in Norway). Scandinavian countries set great examples for a lot of things, but other countries won't try them. Why? Pride, arrogance, fear, effort. America is afraid of socialism so they won't rehabilitate and Asian countries are afraid of the west so they lock up these influences.

Evidently harsher penalties aren't working in Asia for drugs, and in America for murder. People have an "it won't happen to me" attitude, and while that lasts, making examples of people will never work. Criminals are not afraid of prison time or they wouldn't commit the crimes in the first place. 20 years is a long, long time. Schapelle knew that, and yet (if she did it), she did it anyway.

Yep.
And now she's paying the price. Don't see how that's unfair at all.