PDA

View Full Version : Schapelle Corby Guilty/Innocent Poll



Pages : 1 [2]

Axiom
26-01-2006, 01:54 AM
mr sweeney, it is common to confuse the deletrious effects caused by the means by which one ingests a drug ie. smoking, and the drug itself.........obviously smoking ANYTHING is harmful!.........hence your last post needs clarification or is meaningless

Rincewind
26-01-2006, 08:22 AM
Playing football can cause serious injuries. Should football be banned?

Please, God, yes!

McTaggart
26-01-2006, 08:27 AM
i also refer mctagg to prohibitionusa 1920s, CIA drug running, and since usa in afghanistan,heroin flows freely in europe!..............ppl like mctagg are all too happy for the pawns to be burned, but forgets to hit the kings!

Yes Axiom, I know all that and I know that tobacco and grog are harmful drugs,but what is your point? In an ideal world we would start from the top of the food chain in the illicit drug trade and cleanse the world of these scum but in the real world it is not going to happen. So you have to start by wasting the mules. Incidently, you may have noticed that tobacco and alcohol are officially sanctioned by the state. Before you ask,yes, I do know what harm and damage they do . I don't know how you inferred that I was happy only for the dumb clucks at the bottom to get it in the neck. We can debate the plus and minuses of each drug but that should go to another thread,don't you agree? What we are discussing is the fate of Schapelle Corby. You might ask what good would it do to terminate her miserable existence? Answer; probably not a lot.I mean,who remembers the "saint" that the Singaporeans hung a few months ago, Nuwinn who? see, I have even forgotten his name. What a media circus that was,sold lots of newspapers..but no matter what was said no-one could get away from the fact that he was as guilty as sin. Had he been shot immediately as I have advocated there would have been a very muted out-cry and the whole episode would have been forgotten a lot quicker. The professional bleeding hearts like Ray Martin & co would have had to find something else and sad people like qpawn would have found another cause to wring their hands over. So Axiom,lets stick to the point,is Corby guilty or innocent?

qpawn
26-01-2006, 09:42 AM
:)

quoting mctaggart:

The Corbys were exporting for profit. The fearless M Sweeny has summed it up beautifully. The only question to decide is who carries the most guilt in the Corby menage,the father, a convicted criminal? the mother,the mastermind, or the half-wit half brother also convicted,or Mercedes and husband,running a nice little earner out of the surf shop? Come on man, get real.

*******

With respect that is all circumstantial BS; you have no proof that Schapelle was colluding with other family members. I don't know if you are a troll or just being facetious. If you watched 60 minutes last year you would have seen an episode where Australians talked about drugs that had been planted in their bags: jars of cocaine, plants etc. With that in mind Schapelle was entitled to a fair trial; she did not get one. Both the boogie bag and the plastic bag that held the stash were never fingerprinted despite numerous calls from her lawyers for it to happen. That alone should have been enough for the case to have been thrown out as a mistrial. But it is Indonesia where a third-world, punitive mentality is rife and Judge Sirait et al boast about everyone having been found guilty in their court.

For your information I hate drug pushers. No. I loathe them. I agree that they are absolute scum. But do I advocate that the state has the right to take their lives? No, I don't. In that Bali 9 case I would give them all life. The distinction drawn by the prosecution between "ringleaders" and "mules" is BS. I consider all of them to have been "ringleaders" or "organisers" by having participated. I also have no sympathy for any defence that a "fear" of being killed by other runners led some of them into it. I just say "tough" - all 9 have to take responsibilty for having got into such a clique. I also have no problem with how the AFP acted; it is not the role of police to assist prospective criminals.

McTaggart
26-01-2006, 11:10 AM
I agree with you qpawn that it might be all circumstantial BS but you only know as much about the whole sorry episode as we all do. So let us re-cap some of the things that we know for sure. S Corby makes 3 visits in the previous 12 months. Could be entirely innocent or she could be running drugs. Where does she get the money from to do all this? Whoever said "follow the money" was quite smart. Ok, so she arrives in Denpasar with half-brother who is carrying the boogie board bag which incidently by their design are fairly light. They get pulled up by the Customs people,(why?) and little brother hands Schapelle her bag. Now we are supposed to believe that he is that thick that he does not notice the bag is 4.5kg heavier! nor does Schapelle!? it is her bag after all. She puts it on the table and confirms her ownership. she then claims that she knows nothing about anything. This known as the "Manuel defence". Rightly or wrongly this puts the Indos backs up,being treated as idiots etc but they,the Indos, know that they have a good case here,young Aussie caught with a load of grass, all in a days work,why would they need to check for finger prints when they have a vitrual confession? and that 60 mins. thing about nefarious airport smugglers has been debunked by our own good AFP, ( 60 mins program is about as reliable as John Howard when it comes down to telling the truth and presenting the facts in an unspun way. You really need to retain a certain amount of scepticism here) So now here is the moral dilemma that is faced by the Corby family.Schapelle brought the drugs in,caught = guilty. Brother brought drugs in,Schapelle = innocent Brother = guilty. But what to do? Brother keeps quiet and his sister gets 20yrs in the slammer. Rosleigh Rose has a real problem,she can't dobb sonny-boy in as he could get the firing squad,better to take our chances with Schapelle,young,pretty,tears,I am innocent etc,could get off. They all keep stum,Schapelle says nothing as it would not make any difference now, Kensina says nothing as money is thicker than water, you see the fix their are in? I understand they had a brief moment in time when they could have bought her freedom but hummed and hawed for too long opportunity gone. Having regards to her background, and that is all we have to go on, do you mean to say that we are to believe that Schapelle was not privy to what was going on? Come on, qpawn, this is too much! Also it does not help very much when you characterize the Indon society as punitive etc,of course they are! that is why you have to be awfully certain that you are not going to be caught when you go to these countries. It is called forward planning,you have to take in all the risk factors.You seem to understand how the Bali nine got caught, can you not draw a parallel here between the two cases? And what if the innocent are caught and found guilty? I mean if I went to any of these corrupt Asian countries and got drugs planted on me, I would be upset but I would blame only myself for going there.....

McTaggart
26-01-2006, 11:14 AM
As I am new to chat rooms could some-one please tell me what is a troll? I know what a troll means in the Brothers Grimm way, so should I feel insulted or what?

Rincewind
26-01-2006, 11:21 AM
As I am new to chat rooms could some-one please tell me what is a troll? I know what a troll means in the Brothers Grimm way, so should I feel insulted or what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

qpawn
26-01-2006, 11:23 AM
A troll means someone who is posting purely to ge nerate spam. The troll often uses a deliberate racist comment or something absurd to provoke ridicule.

In your case you might be a "cunning" troll who is making emotive statements to provoke my comments. You may well be aware of the flaws in your arguments but you post those points anyway.

I said that you "might" be a troll! Without telepathy or some psychic facility I can not tell the intent of your posts!

That's all a troll means - it is quite a common term in chat rooms.

qpawn
26-01-2006, 12:16 PM
Mctaggart, I suggest that you resist the temptation to lapse from facts into theorising.

What, exactly, is your point with the argument about noticing extra weight in the bag? Suppose you were innocent. You get off the plane and feel an extra weight in your bags. What would you do? Panic? Rush for the nearest toilet, in hope of disposing of whatever it might be, before opening your bag up? Engage in self-denial and hope to get through customs? I am not sure what I would do. Dropping the bag and fleeing might not be a lot of use if your ID is in the bags.

And you have no faith in the Sixty Minutes episode but do have faith in the AFP?? Where is the consistency in your skepticism?

I am skeptical towards a lot of things in the media. The ethics of channel 9's coverage of the Schapelle case also raises questions such as Liz Hayes using locals to get up a Bali tower near the Kerobokan prison. Those locals then "vanished" or were arrested. To what degree should channel 9 take responsibility for "using" the locals to get a story. That's a hard thing to answer. It is at least very disconcerting journalism.

But I did find the story by Sixty Minutes quite credible. Why would anyone come forward and say that stuff was planted in their luggage x number of years ago if it did not happen? And there were at least 2 cases of it that the program covered. The people in question were just normal everyday people - not hippies or anything stereoptypical of drug taking or trafficking. Unless channel 9, for some reason I cannot fathom, hired actors to stage the story I find that episode quite credible.

jenni
26-01-2006, 03:17 PM
. Do you have any personal experience of what effect that drugs have on a family or individual? And an answer like " I have'nt but I can imagine what it would be like" does not really cut it.... Sure the individual druggo has to accept their responsibility but the low-life that caused so much damaged and mayhem to the fabric of society by supplying the poison simply do not care.
!

I have, with a niece who spent 6 years addicted and it almost tore their family apart. Fortunately she did have a very supportive family and a final last ditch effort saw my sister-in-law bring my niece back to Australia and cut off all contact with her old group of friends. She has now been off drugs for 8 years, has run a successful small business and is getting married later this year.

The point is, she had a health problem not a criminal problem and needed help not prosecution.

I agree that the people who push drugs are the problem, but often they are pushing to fund their own addiction. It is the bastards higher up the chain who need eliminating, but they are the ones who never get touched and just carry on laughing all the way to the bank.

What has 30 years of prohibition and ciminalisation achieved? Probably a 1,000,000 % more addicts and crime.....

Active campaigns and education on the problems of cigarette smoking has achieved huge reductions in smoking in the developed world.

In my opinion the reason why we don't move to decriminalising drugs is because too many pollies in America are influenced by drug cartels. i.e they are awash with money - how hard is to channel some of it to lobbying and influencing the political system..

jenni
26-01-2006, 03:21 PM
Hello Jenni,

How is the boycott going? Also, I see Schapelle's younger brother is being charged with drug possession and drug trafficking on the Gold Coast.

All I have to say is : hmm : (wish I had emoticons here)

I know I read about it today (having only got back to Canberra late last night, I'm not up with the latest Aussie happenings...)

Poor girl - no-one is going to believe she is innocent now.

My boycott is progressing well - the Indonesian products we used are all easily sourced from other Asian countries! Although my faith in Schapelle might be shaken, the farce of Michelle's trial didn't incline me to want to buy anything from Indonesia.

Garvinator
26-01-2006, 03:25 PM
My boycott is progressing well - the Indonesian products we used are all easily sourced from other Asian countries! Although my faith in Schapelle might be shaken, the farce of Michelle's trial didn't incline me to want to buy anything from Indonesia.
the same other asian countries that have similiar penalties and similiar court systems, thatll teach em:doh:

Axiom
26-01-2006, 03:32 PM
jenni- totally correct, and well said.............drugs flourish due to the odd but powerful synergy between black market and "moral majority", ensuring its illegality,along with its high profits, and the continuing ghastly conveyer belt ,horror circus , hanging the small fry....so to give the "appearance" of justice!...................drugs are a health issue , not a judicial one, unless you want cheap prison labour ala usa etc.....pure evil.

jenni
26-01-2006, 03:57 PM
the same other asian countries that have similiar penalties and similiar court systems, thatll teach em:doh:

Who said I was rational? - Just emotional....

Davidflude
26-01-2006, 04:14 PM
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Bush Administation does not understand the theory of evolution.

They have for some time being arial spraying the Coca plantations in South America. At first this killed off almost all the coca plants. The locals replanted using the plants that survived. Now the plantations are more resistant to the herbicide than the weeds. When the US air force sprays the plantations it provides the locals with free weeding so increasing production.

Axiom
26-01-2006, 10:07 PM
how poignant.

McTaggart
26-01-2006, 10:16 PM
Is Schapelle Corby guilty or innocent?

noswonky
26-01-2006, 11:36 PM
Yes.

Axiom
27-01-2006, 12:17 AM
getting back to the thread.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is Schapelle Corby guilty or innocent?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by McTaggart : 26-01-2006 at 11:40 PM.

irrelevant in the big picture.

McTaggart
27-01-2006, 06:53 AM
Well, either I am in the wrong thread or you are:

jenni
27-01-2006, 12:29 PM
Well, either I am in the wrong thread or you are:

How politically correct - you are trying to stop us from indulging in thread drift.

Those nasty mods will probably be creating a new thread soon. :cool:

McTaggart
27-01-2006, 07:32 PM
Au contraire,Jenni. I thought we were discussing Corbys guilt or innocence. If everybody wants to debate the horrible effects that drug-use is having on our society,well, ok.lets do it. In the meantime,lets not drag red herrings across the trail other-wise we will get no where on the topic. Agreed? qpawn quotes media sources to back his claim that Schapelle was set up and then proceeds to destroy their credibility in the same paragraph, I like that. It seems that we are having a hard time separating fact from wishful thinking. If you wish Schapelle to be innocent then it is natural, I suppose, to grasp on to stories put out by the Media(Channel 9?) Ok, I didn't see that particular program so I cannot really comment. I have watched quite a few Current Affair shows and always have been left with a deep sense of distaste for the reporters/show etc Media Watch has exposed these programs so many times it has ceased to become a joke.The bottom line for TV/newspapers is to sell more advertizing and newspapers. Once you get that fixed in your mind it is not too hard to understand where they are coming from. I feel very deeply for your sister-in-law.I really do, but it was not your personal experience 24/7
it was she who had to live through that particular hell.

Through hours of TV coverage and tons of news print we have run the entire gamut of human emotion,from poor little Aussie girl unfairly charged by those slimy Indos and their attendant corrupt judicial system to now the finger of guilt is pointing fair and square at her/criminal family.. I wrote earlier that Mother Rose was caught on the horns of a dilemma,infact,it is an exquisite dilemma,(I nearly said Sophies Choice,but you cannot compare the two) which is totally wasted on this dross. Yes,qpawn, I was theorizing to some extent,after all we really know so little of what actually happened,no one does, including you. So what are you doing, quoting dodgy Tv shows who are relating other peoples experiences with their baggage and then trying to link this to Schapelles' case. It happen to them so it must have happened to her!
it does not quite go so neatly like that in real life. Even Jenni has her doubts now as has just about everybody else,excepting you and Axiom,who does not want to think about it at all.

This leads us back to the main topic of the thread and I say "Guilty as Hell", and off to the firing squad with her and at the same time showing her as much compassion as she and her criminal family have shown towards the rest of society,ie NONE.....may your God go with you....

Axiom
27-01-2006, 08:55 PM
lets for a moment suppose corby is guilty, so what??....it is irrelevant, no matter, she still must be imprisoned for a barbaric amount of time, regardless of her innocence or lack there of, it seems..........but the mctaggs of this world ,who continue to mire us in the dark age,cant see the big picture and are stuck on small picture inconsequentials............DRUGS ARE A HEALTH ISSUE, NOT A JUDICIAL ONE!

Mischa
27-01-2006, 09:39 PM
lets for a moment suppose corby is guilty, so what??....it is irrelevant, no matter, she still must be imprisoned for a barbaric amount of time, regardless of her innocence or lack there of, it seems..........but the mctaggs of this world ,who continue to mire us in the dark age,cant see the big picture and are stuck on small picture inconsequentials............DRUGS ARE A HEALTH ISSUE, NOT A JUDICIAL ONE!

But this is the life of a human being

Axiom
27-01-2006, 09:52 PM
But this is the life of a human being
PRECISELY!

PHAT
27-01-2006, 11:24 PM
... I say "Guilty as Hell", and off to the firing squad with her and at the same time showing her as much compassion as she and her criminal family have shown towards the rest of society,ie NONE.....may your God go with you....

Firing Squad isa bit of a waste of human flesh. Can't she be put to use as a sex slave for the entire Indo army. It might help reduce agression and prevent an Indo-Oz war.

McTaggart
28-01-2006, 08:22 AM
But this is the life of a human being


Mischa, this raises questions about what sort of human being which may be straying of the subject perhaps. After all,they are lesser human beings,ie the pond life of society and as such do not warrant much consideration. Ask yourself,would the world be a worse place if the Corbys,if by some felicitious accident, were wiped of the face of the earth? what qualities do they bring with them?..No Mischa,these people do not deserve your compassion as they would not extend any towards you or your family. That thought would not cross their frontal lobes........The fearless M Sweeny is a little bit extreme with some of his suggestions,however worthy they are in a waste not want not sort of way, but likely to invite further complications. I still think and many would agree that the quick bullet is more humane than any other solutions. Matts' solutions involve a certain amount of suffering and unnecessary cruelty which would be abhorrent to the vast majority......

qpawn
28-01-2006, 08:23 AM
qpawn quotes media sources to back his claim that Schapelle was set up and then proceeds to destroy their credibility in the same paragraph

********

That is a naive treatment of what I said. I was making the rather complex point that the media has both the potential to act unethically and, at times, the ability to act responsibly. It is not inconsistent for me to use my discretion to find a story by Sixty Mintues credible while being as cynical as you are towards the ad hoc, chequebook journalism of drivel like ACA.

***************
From Mactaggart:

So what are you doing, quoting dodgy Tv shows who are relating other peoples experiences with their baggage and then trying to link this to Schapelles' case. It happen to them so it must have happened to her!
it does not quite go so neatly like that in real life

*******************
Again, that is a very simplistic critique of what I said. Of course I am not saying that because stuff was planted in other people's luggage it must have happened to Schapelle. I am using that along with the absent fingerprinting of the bags, these cases of planting form enough doubt in the prosecution's case for a verdict of innocent or mistrial to have been justified.

Of course I wasn't at the airport when Schapelle was arrested. But I can still form the best conclusion that I can based upon evidence rather than hypothesising about collusion by other family members. I have been to the meetings of a Schapelle Corby support so I have heard every argument about the case and I have weighed the evidence up many times. After doing that and using 30 years of life experience which makes me pretty good at picking a liar, I have concluded that, to the best of my knowledge and ability, Schapelle is innocent and a tragic injustice has occurred.

For Mactaggart or anyone else who does not share my view of her innocence, I will repeat what I said in an earlier paragraph. If you want the full facts from people who are in regular contact with Schapelle's family then PM me and I will give you the Schapelle Corby support website and you will get our newsletter. Then, if you want to conclude that Schapelle should have been given a death sentence, while I vehemently disagree with your opinion at least you have tried to gather some facts before reaching it.

Rincewind
28-01-2006, 08:55 AM
Mischa, this raises questions about what sort of human being which may be straying of the subject perhaps. After all,they are lesser human beings,ie the pond life of society and as such do not warrant much consideration. Ask yourself,would the world be a worse place if the Corbys,if by some felicitious accident, were wiped of the face of the earth? what qualities do they bring with them?..No Mischa,these people do not deserve your compassion as they would not extend any towards you or your family. That thought would not cross their frontal lobes........The fearless M Sweeny is a little bit extreme with some of his suggestions,however worthy they are in a waste not want not sort of way, but likely to invite further complications. I still think and many would agree that the quick bullet is more humane than any other solutions. Matts' solutions involve a certain amount of suffering and unnecessary cruelty which would be abhorrent to the vast majority......

I, for one, cannot subscribe to your relativistic assessment of human beings. Also compassion is not a commodity to be traded with like-minded members of society. If you believe that then you are totally bereft of it.

Further your call for swift "justice" is just plain ludicrous and shows either an extreme lack of maturity or a total disregard to societal norms of a right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence. I hope for your sake it is the former.

McTaggart
01-02-2006, 02:12 PM
Jenni,did you watch the program hosted by Kerry O'Brien on the ABC recently where Corby(Snr) was interviewed? If you missed it I will fill you in on the relevant details. Sufficed to say, qpawn can drop the "We asked the Indons to finger -print the bag and contents, and they refused" defence. It turns out that the AFP offered to check the bag and contents for finger prints and more importantly, DNA test the marjuana! Guess what? The Corbys refused permission even though it may have very well have freed their daughter! Amazing....I know qpawn does not like you to join the dots, but this just raises more questions, don't you agree?

McTaggart
01-02-2006, 02:21 PM
Of course, Jenni, there will be a really simple explanation for all this and I just can't wait to hear/read it. the phrase " There are none so blind that they cannot see" comes to mind

Steve K
01-02-2006, 03:00 PM
Here's the transcript from the 7.30 Report aired on Jan 30th - 2 days ago:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2006/s1558393.htm

I missed the program but the transcript certainly makes for interesting reading.

jenni
01-02-2006, 05:11 PM
Jenni,did you watch the program hosted by Kerry O'Brien on the ABC recently where Corby(Snr) was interviewed? If you missed it I will fill you in on the relevant details. Sufficed to say, qpawn can drop the "We asked the Indons to finger -print the bag and contents, and they refused" defence. It turns out that the AFP offered to check the bag and contents for finger prints and more importantly, DNA test the marjuana! Guess what? The Corbys refused permission even though it may have very well have freed their daughter! Amazing....I know qpawn does not like you to join the dots, but this just raises more questions, don't you agree?

They claim in the paper today that they signed a permission to do DNA testing. Who knows!

What amazes me is that you seem personally vindictive towards this poor girl.

I was in Mt Isa during the Lindy Chamberlain case and I saw the same thing. People who had never met her seemed to feel it was their personal tragedy and were so desperate to see her in jail. Everyone seemed to know someone who had met her and knew for a fact that she was guilty....

Davidflude
01-02-2006, 05:36 PM
That was a classic "Salem Witches" trial.

McTaggart
01-02-2006, 05:37 PM
No,never...I am just amazed that people can convince themselves that Corby is an innocent party to all this. Lets put it this way,I would like someone to come forward to clear her name and that she freed immediately but face it,that is looking less likely each time some more info comes out. But if you think she is innocent that's fine. This what the thread is all about,people expressing their point of view....I mean, I can understand Lindy Chamberlain murdering her infant,after all, she was suffering from post-natal depression and should have never gone to prison but let us not get into the one!

jenni
01-02-2006, 05:50 PM
No,never...I am just amazed that people can convince themselves that Corby is an innocent party to all this. Lets put it this way,I would like someone to come forward to clear her name and that she freed immediately but face it,that is looking less likely each time some more info comes out. But if you think she is innocent that's fine. This what the thread is all about,people expressing their point of view
I have to admit in the face of all the evidence that is coming out I am now neutral to Schapelle, rather than thinking she is innocent. Her family seems seriously dodgy.


....I mean, I can understand Lindy Chamberlain murdering her infant,after all, she was suffering from post-natal depression and should have never gone to prison but let us not get into the one!

Umm - I thought she had been totally cleared of all charges and they admitted to a serious miscarriage of justice? Sounds like you have missed that bit...

antichrist
04-07-2006, 11:23 PM
I thought she would have better off serving out her sentence in Bali as eventually may have been able to bribe her way out when brahouha dies down.

qpawn
05-07-2006, 02:39 PM
It also won't be a clearcut decision for Schapelle because, as I understand it, she has to waive all rights of appeal to be transferred. Siregar, her lawyer, is still mounting an extraordinary appeal to have the case heard again.

I don't know if she did the crime or not. But in my life I have always followed my instinct and it's never let me down; it says firmly that she is innocent .

Kevin Bonham
05-07-2006, 04:02 PM
But in my life I have always followed my instinct and it's never let me down;

What about on the chessboard?

Arrogant-One
05-07-2006, 04:05 PM
What about on the chessboard?
Next question :P

bergil
05-07-2006, 06:33 PM
I don't know if she did the crime or not. But in my life I have always followed my instinct and it's never let me down;


What about on the chessboard?
It didn't let him down there either because he quit playing over the board chess. :owned:

qpawn
05-07-2006, 06:42 PM
My instincts strongly point to great happiness in correspondence chess and endless frustration in tournament halls. :lol:

I am gunning for the happiness option. Gotta lickalick those stamps.

antichrist
05-07-2006, 10:49 PM
I turned against Sharpell when I put two and two together. That is the ganga was about 4.5 kilos, and I picked up a boogie board and it only weighted about 1 kilo at most. So if something was about 4 times heavier than should have been Jesus Christ she would have known the difference. No way could she claim that she did not know about it.

qpawn
06-07-2006, 12:07 PM
Fine. But what is your argument? That she was innocent and should have rushed to the nearest bathroom to flush all the stuff?

antichrist
06-07-2006, 06:03 PM
Fine. But what is your argument? That she was innocent and should have rushed to the nearest bathroom to flush all the stuff?

She should have sold it before joining the queue.

Desmond
14-02-2007, 03:50 PM
Anyone want to change their vote?

Taigastyle
14-02-2007, 05:08 PM
A few shows on today tonight.

Still a mixed opinion though. Jodie would have gotten alot of money

ElevatorEscapee
17-02-2007, 04:45 PM
Nice to see people are still making money out of this... NOT!!! (thank you Borat! :) ). What a wank! :eek:

zigzag
07-03-2007, 10:27 AM
Nice to see people are still making money out of this... NOT!!! (thank you Borat! :) ). What a wank! :eek:

Looks like she will be serving out her sentence in Australia.
The "current affair" shows will be going into hyperdrive!:lol:

Axiom
07-03-2007, 04:54 PM
Looks like she will be serving out her sentence in Australia.
The "current affair" shows will be going into hyperdrive!:lol:
Yes the media loves to concentrate on lower level crime, thats for sure! see the information war thread!

Basil
07-03-2007, 05:11 PM
Yes the media loves to concentrate on lower level crime, thats for sure! see the information war thread!
I don't need to read anyone else's POV to know that is not correct. Especially when there's a reasonable chance they know less about the subject than me! Regardless ...

It is true that some of the media do concentrate on the small stuff - they are commonly referred to as the 6 o'clock news and tabloid newspapers :doh:

This is so because of market forces. The same reason that page 3 girls, talk back radio and man-bites-dog stories sell. The audience has the attention / intellect of a flea. I can assure you the quest for ratings is a much greater motivator of what goes to air than any other theory you may wish to throw up.

Ax, I think you know this already. Perhaps it's just an inconvenient truth that doesn't fit your theory? :eek:

Axiom
07-03-2007, 05:42 PM
I don't need to read anyone else's POV to know that is not correct. Especially when there's a reasonable chance they know less about the subject than me! Regardless ...

It is true that some of the media do concentrate on the small stuff - they are commonly referred to as the 6 o'clock news and tabloid newspapers :doh:

This is so because of market forces. The same reason that page 3 girls, talk back radio and man-bites-dog stories sell. The audience has the attention / intellect of a flea. I can assure you the quest for ratings is a much greater motivator of what goes to air than any other theory you may wish to throw up.

Ax, I think you know this already. Perhaps it's just an inconvenient truth that doesn't fit your theory? :eek:
BUT IS IT THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG? Do people gravitate towards relative trivia because thats their primary interest, or is relative trivia promoted so they do gravitate to it?......i agree partly with what you say, but i dont undersell human's intellect as much as you do. I believe people really dont have viable choices when it comes to information gathering,and story priorities are set by ratings/circulation etc, but look at the ratings when 'big conspiracy stories ' are aired - see jfk ,diana death .enron, the oz govt wheat to saddam scandal !!..........i would argue ,when ppl are actually given the opportunity to access these high level mystery/crimes they come in their droves!.....Its just they simply dont have the channels open enough to have much choice in the information they recieve.(and i dont know if this is urban myth-but apparantly '4 corners' has a room filled with taped stories ,not allowed to be aired,this would not surprise me.......see the underground circulation of raymond hoser's books on victorian police corruption !)

Basil
07-03-2007, 06:22 PM
BUT IS IT THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG?
No it's not. Some people are just planks. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?


Do people gravitate towards relative trivia because thats their primary interest, or is relative trivia promoted so they do gravitate to it?
No. They're planks. The hard stuff gets a go. Despite best ideals, it always gravitates to the lowest common denominator. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?


I would argue ,when ppl are actually given the opportunity to access these high level mystery/crimes they come in their droves!
No. They don't. This BB proves both:
-- that sufficiently intelligent people exposed to *******s aren't interested, and
-- that the *******s information is readily available.
Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Ax, we are going nowhere. We've established that some conspiracies exist So? It's human nature. No-one's shocked. Mainstream media reports. I believe your side is all about rhetorical questions.

When we did the British 'dressed up as insurgents thing', I spent time rebutting it - AND THEN it turned you weren't sure whether George Bush & Tony Blair (or others) were sanctioning murder for the sake of propaganda. You hang these things out there, and under specific scrutiny, you're not even sure yourself. I want a conspiracy that you think exists, where you have some evidence, not just a hunch that sounds plausible.

I really feel my time is being wasted. If we can't make progress soon, I'll be vacating my position on this discussion. Thanks.

Axiom
07-03-2007, 06:40 PM
No it's not. Some people are just planks. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?


No. They're planks. The hard stuff gets a go. Despite best ideals, it always gravitates to the lowest common denominator. Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?


No. They don't. This BB proves both:
-- that sufficiently intelligent people exposed to *******s aren't interested, and
-- that the *******s information is readily available.
Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Ax, we are going nowhere. We've established that some conspiracies exist So? It's human nature. No-one's shocked. Mainstream media reports. I believe your side is all about rhetorical questions.

When we did the British 'dressed up as insurgents thing', I spent time rebutting it - AND THEN it turned you weren't sure whether George Bush & Tony Blair (or others) were sanctioning murder for the sake of propaganda. You hang these things out there, and under specific scrutiny, you're not even sure yourself. I want a conspiracy that you think exists, where you have some evidence, not just a hunch that sounds plausible.

Please state the nature of your position again. Sum it up in a paragraph please. I don't need proof just yet. I just want to know what we're discussing. There are sufficient people on this BB claiming you haven't moved them one jot, with no-one supporting your position.

I really feel my time is being wasted. If we can't make progress soon, I'll be vacating my position on this discussion. Thanks.
firstly- please relocate these posts to the ******* thread

please read recent posts there

my summary- is that ppl are significantly kept in the dark re important big stories, that the media is full of lies and propaganda, and only clever fine investigative detective-like scrutiny can reveal any furthering in insight and knowledge as to a more real understanding of truth and reality.

my position is not(yet) to prove anything,simply to expand awareness of the full spectrum of news available, not the narrow distortion in the mainstream(and yes ,of course they do cover some major stories too,its the way they prioritise and emphasise it,or simply distort or omit them- the best you could muster re the arab dressed brits planting bombs was that it was to blow up the enemy! cmon-you can see the obvious flaw there.I'M SIMPLY SAYING FALSE FLAG EXISTS, AND THAT QUITE LIKELY THAT WAS ONE EXAMPLE.

hd- did you read that top ten false flag article i posted link to?
can you please read the top journos outlining mass media cover ups in ithe ******* thread.

i am continually piling up material to support my position, are you actually reading any of it? have you researched any one story yet yourself?

hd- now please summarise your position, so we have a basis for discussion.

Basil
07-03-2007, 07:47 PM
the best you could muster re the arab dressed brits planting bombs was that it was to blow up the enemy!
Yes, I firmly believe they were planting bombs to blow up the enemy


cmon-you can see the obvious flaw there.
No, What was the flaw?


I'M SIMPLY SAYING FALSE FLAG EXISTS, AND THAT QUITE LIKELY THAT WAS ONE EXAMPLE
You've proved nothing. Quite likely?


hd- did you read that top ten false flag article i posted link to?
No.


i am continually piling up material to support my position, are you actually reading any of it?
No you're not.


now please summarise your position, so we have a basis for discussion.
The western media is a fantastic system. It is diverse. It is independently owned. It is government owned. Market forces are at play to ensure the compete against each other.

Conspiracies exist. It's human nature. The media busts its boiler daily to break these stories.

Axiom
07-03-2007, 08:00 PM
Yes, I firmly believe they were planting bombs to blow up the enemy


No, What was the flaw?


You've proved nothing. Quite likely?


No.


No you're not.


The western media is a fantastic system. It is diverse. It is independently owned. It is government owned. Market forces are at play to ensure the compete against each other.

Conspiracies exist. It's human nature. The media busts its boiler daily to break these stories.
take this to *******s thread

antichrist
28-05-2010, 05:50 PM
I now feel sorry that she may be losing her sanity. I hear the the Aussie govt is trying to have her transferred to Australia - I hope so.

Capablanca-Fan
29-05-2010, 01:00 AM
I now feel sorry that she may be losing her sanity. I hear the the Aussie govt is trying to have her transferred to Australia - I hope so.
I agree; for all the whinging about Gitmo, Asian prisons are far worse, but Leftards never bleat about those. I didn't trust the justice system in that corruptocracy Indonesia anyway.

antichrist
29-05-2010, 03:11 PM
I agree; for all the whinging about Gitmo, Asian prisons are far worse, but Leftards never bleat about those. I didn't trust the justice system in that corruptocracy Indonesia anyway.

Or come off it JOno, Bali prisons may have not be that hygenic, but before Schappele whinged about the prison in a book (to get money) she had quite a bit of freedom. Outtings for hairdoings, meals, a boyfriend inside tv, etc etc.

In Gitmo there were all kind of deprivations and torture. No contact with relos or outside world etc etc

Your posts shows just how biased you are. As well colonalist countries have exploited most of those third world countries that now provide terrorists against USA - if not currently then certainly in the past.

Desmond
17-06-2010, 01:01 PM
Makes Schapelle look like a lightweight:

230kg of marijuana found in Samsung heiress' luggage (http://www.news.com.au/world/kg-of-marijuana-found-in-samsung-heiress-luggage/story-e6frfkyi-1225880826706)

Kevin Bonham
17-06-2010, 02:56 PM
Makes Schapelle look like a lightweight:

230kg of marijuana found in Samsung heiress' luggage (http://www.news.com.au/world/kg-of-marijuana-found-in-samsung-heiress-luggage/story-e6frfkyi-1225880826706)

Makes Schapelle look almost intelligent too.

TheJoker
17-06-2010, 03:03 PM
Makes Schapelle look like a lightweight:

230kg of marijuana found in Samsung heiress' luggage (http://www.news.com.au/world/kg-of-marijuana-found-in-samsung-heiress-luggage/story-e6frfkyi-1225880826706)

Samsung have made a statement denying that she is in anyway related to the Lee family that owns/runs Samsung.

From what I can garner that's just a line she spun to police, along with a bunch of other strange stories, and the media just ran with it. If turns out she has nothing to do with Samsung then it is sloppy journalism

Kevin Bonham
17-06-2010, 03:06 PM
From what I can garner that's just a line she spun to police, along with a bunch of other strange stories, and the media just ran with it. If turns out she has nothing to do with Samsung then it is sloppy journalism

Indeed. Yet another case for creating an offence of aggravated stupidity.

Igor_Goldenberg
17-06-2010, 08:46 PM
Makes Schapelle look like a lightweight:

230kg of marijuana found in Samsung heiress' luggage (http://www.news.com.au/world/kg-of-marijuana-found-in-samsung-heiress-luggage/story-e6frfkyi-1225880826706)

Someone must've slipped it between luggage collection and custom control:lol: :lol:

Capablanca-Fan
18-06-2010, 06:31 AM
Indeed. Yet another case for creating an offence of aggravated stupidity.
Wouldn't be much left of Parliament then.

Hobbes
09-11-2011, 02:13 PM
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/books/we-agree--corby-is-guilty-says-publisher-20111109-1n6fw.html

antichrist
09-11-2011, 05:56 PM
well it now seems accepted that she is guilty, yet most voters in this poll declared her innocent - can I be trumphant?

Desmond
06-02-2014, 11:51 AM
Asked how Corby would celebrate her freedom, [her former lawyer] Ms Smith-Douglas said: "She'll probably pop a cork of champagne and then roll up a big marijuana joint the size of a cigar and then kick back and enjoy herself."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/schapelle-corbys-exlawyer-plays-down-big-marijuana-joint-comments-20140206-hvbf2.html#ixzz2sVDzrc1I


bwaHAHAHAHAHA

Adamski
06-02-2014, 03:09 PM
There are rumours she will be freed but no evidence. If she is freed I very much doubt that she will celebrate as suggested by Kerry S-D. The Corby family in Australia have blasted her for her comment which she now claims was just a joke.

Desmond
06-02-2014, 03:58 PM
There are rumours she will be freed but no evidence. If she is freed I very much doubt that she will celebrate as suggested by Kerry S-D. The Corby family in Australia have blasted her for her comment which she bow claims was just a joke.Sounds like a joke to me and a pretty good one too.

Maybe Corby will pack her boogie board and head down the coast.

Desmond
10-02-2014, 08:07 PM
Well she's out of prison now, though "freedom" might be overstating it.

Channel 7 reportedly paying $3m for exclusive interview.

I guess it couldn't have come at a better time for channel 9 either, with their show about her airing last night. I found it utterly boring personally. Hopefully the interview will be better.

Capablanca-Fan
11-02-2014, 01:48 AM
Well she's out of prison now, though "freedom" might be overstating it.

Channel 7 reportedly paying $3m for exclusive interview.

I guess it couldn't have come at a better time for channel 9 either, with their show about her airing last night. I found it utterly boring personally. Hopefully the interview will be better.
I agree. Will the government freeze the proceeds though, as they unfairly did with the book royalties, on the grounds that one should not profit from a crime. I would agree with the sentiment, but it should apply only to convictions in an Australian court not in the corrupt Indonesian courts that give a slap on the wrist to terrorists.

Desmond
11-02-2014, 06:48 AM
I agree. Will the government freeze the proceeds though, as they unfairly did with the book royalties, on the grounds that one should not profit from a crime. I would agree with the sentiment, but it should apply only to convictions in an Australian court not in the corrupt Indonesian courts that give a slap on the wrist to terrorists.This question was asked on Q&A last night, about proceeds of crime laws. The pollies wouldn't be drawn on the specific case but they did seem to indicate it was outside Australia's jurisdiction. At least as long as she is.

Kevin Bonham
11-02-2014, 12:06 PM
I would agree with the sentiment, but it should apply only to convictions in an Australian court not in the corrupt Indonesian courts that give a slap on the wrist to terrorists.

Slaps on the wrist like those given to Muklas, Amrozi and Imam Samudra?

Some of this was discussed at the time - Corby would probably have been found guilty here too (albeit of something that should not be an offence in either nation).

Most voters on the poll thought she was innocent; I didn't.

Sir Cromulent Sparkles
11-02-2014, 08:50 PM
Corby would probably have been found guilty here too (albeit of something that should not be an offence in either nation).


Hi kb, I'm just wondering which offence you are talking about.

I would have thought that tax avoidance would be a deserved charge against her in both countries.

btw, I would have voted guilty / guilty in the poll had i voted. (or commando unit just for fun :D).

Im a little worried that some people think she should have been executed.

Kevin Bonham
11-02-2014, 09:10 PM
Hi kb, I'm just wondering which offence you are talking about.

I would have thought that tax avoidance would be a deserved charge against her in both countries.

That only arises from the existing illegality of the drug. Is someone avoiding tax if they transport 4.2 litres of legally purchased alcohol?

Capablanca-Fan
13-02-2014, 03:41 PM
Leave Schapelle’s money alone (http://freedomwatch.ipa.org.au/leave-schapelles-money-alone/)
by Chris Berg on February 13, 2014 in Freedom of speech

The Queensland government is investigating whether it can prevent Schapelle Corby from being paid for her first interview (http://www.news.com.au/national/campbell-newman-could-stop-schapelle-corby-being-paid-for-interview/story-fncynjr2-1226824068589) since her release from a Bali jail – and, presumably, any future media deals she might make.
The press has dutifully rolled out legal experts who either think it is highly likely (http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/government-likely-to-extract-big-share-of-interview-money-20140210-32d0s.html) Queensland (or the Commonwealth) would be successful, or highly unlikely (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2014/02/12/12/01/qld-looks-to-block-corby-crime-profits).
Either way, rumours are Corby already has a $2+ million deal lined up already with Channel Seven.
And good for her. Any attempt to take that money, or prevent her selling her story now or in the future, would be a clear and basic breach of her right to freedom of speech.

Corby is not being paid $2+ million for doing something illegal, she’s being paid for answering questions in front of a camera.
That counts as work – and work which many Australians are eager to watch. She’s entitled to negotiate whatever price she can get for it.

Rincewind
13-02-2014, 04:00 PM
Regarding the links, to my reading of the linked stories both experts are saying the commonwealth have a good chance of stopping the funds flowing to Corby. The difference is one expert says Queensland might find it difficult and the other expert doesn't mention Queensland.

Chris Berg seems to have a fundamental issue with the literary proceeds of crime. Trading on notoriety is something which is specifically targeted by the law and can be thought of a proceeds of a crime. It is not the material proceeds of a crime but the notoriety that is generated by criminal involvement is a tradable commodity.

As far as it being a freedom of speech issue I can't see how that is applied since no one is gagging Corby nor is she denied an avenue to have her views expressed. Just the financial proceeds of doing so are being collected by the commonwealth.

Desmond
13-02-2014, 06:53 PM
What if her notoriety contributes to her getting a job, Eg in her capacity as a beautician? Shall the government have that too?

Sir Cromulent Sparkles
13-02-2014, 10:37 PM
That only arises from the existing illegality of the drug. Is someone avoiding tax if they transport 4.2 litres of legally purchased alcohol?

They could be avoiding tax but transportation of a legal item does not implicitly indicate that the person is undertaking subsequent crime.

Unless a drug trafficker is going to fill out their tax return indicating a profit from the proceeds of their "profession", they are clearly willing to flout the law in regards to non reporting of profits.

Capablanca-Fan
14-02-2014, 02:27 AM
Chris Berg seems to have a fundamental issue with the literary proceeds of crime. Trading on notoriety is something which is specifically targeted by the law and can be thought of a proceeds of a crime. It is not the material proceeds of a crime but the notoriety that is generated by criminal involvement is a tradable commodity.
One issue should also be: a conviction in an Australian court. It's disgusting how Campbell Newman and Joe Hockey are fawning over the corrupt Indonesian justice system.


As far as it being a freedom of speech issue I can't see how that is applied since no one is gagging Corby nor is she denied an avenue to have her views expressed. Just the financial proceeds of doing so are being collected by the commonwealth.
That amounts to gagging by imposing a huge fine on her.

Rincewind
14-02-2014, 11:36 AM
One issue should also be: a conviction in an Australian court. It's disgusting how Campbell Newman and Joe Hockey are fawning over the corrupt Indonesian justice system.

No it isn't. The act only stipulates that it has to be illegal in Australia (and importing drugs is so) and that the income is derived in Australia (which a payment by an Australian television network ticks that box).


That amounts to gagging by imposing a huge fine on her.

Not at all. Freedom of speech protects expression of an opinion not income potentially derived for that opinion. Since notoriety is an intangible proceeds of criminal behaviour, trading on that notoriety is fair game for the proceeds of crime laws.

Desmond
14-02-2014, 12:09 PM
It probably won't go ahead now anyway.

http://www.watoday.com.au/comment/indonesian-realpolitik-scotches-schapelle-corby-interview-20140214-32ppk.html



...The clause in regulations that minister Amir Syamsuddin and his deputy, Denny Indrayana, invoked against Corby - a prohibition on parolees causing (variously translated) political upset, restlessness or “polemic” - would not be out of place in a dictatorship. But it exists in Indonesia, and Dr Denny dusted it off and cited it to stop her interview with Channel Seven's Mike Willesee.
It's hard to see that Corby or her family can push ahead with an interview now, paid or unpaid. ...

pax
14-02-2014, 12:53 PM
Leave Schapelle’s money alone (http://freedomwatch.ipa.org.au/leave-schapelles-money-alone/)
by Chris Berg on February 13, 2014 in Freedom of speech
...
Corby is not being paid $2+ million for doing something illegal, she’s being paid for answering questions in front of a camera.
That counts as work – and work which many Australians are eager to watch. She’s entitled to negotiate whatever price she can get for it.

So a murderer or rapist who talks or writes about their crimes should be free to cash in whatever they can get? Welcome to Jono's free market paradise.

Capablanca-Fan
14-02-2014, 01:48 PM
No it isn't. The act only stipulates that it has to be illegal in Australia (and importing drugs is so) and that the income is derived in Australia (which a payment by an Australian television network ticks that box).
But she hasn't been convicted of this illegality in an Australian court, only in the corrupt Indonesian terrorist-coddling court system.

Capablanca-Fan
14-02-2014, 01:49 PM
So a murderer or rapist who talks or writes about their crimes should be free to cash in whatever they can get? Welcome to Jono's free market paradise.
Amazing what leftards like Pax will do to justify their socialism. Now it's comparing murders and rapes to an illegality for which Corby hasn't even been convicted in a decent court.

Rincewind
14-02-2014, 03:17 PM
But she hasn't been convicted of this illegality in an Australian court, only in the corrupt Indonesian terrorist-coddling court system.

No I already address that. The act simply requires the crime to be illegal in Australia. We can't try all cases in Australia when some Australians are involved in crimes in other jurisdictions. However had the crime in question had not been illegal in Australia then the proceeds of crime laws would not apply.

Note that the act does not require Corby to have been convicted of the offense in question. So the fact that she was convicted in an Indonesia court is not crucial to the application of the act in this case.

Capablanca-Fan
14-02-2014, 04:47 PM
No I already address that. The act simply requires the crime to be illegal in Australia.
Well, someone could be convicted of murder, to use Pax' example, in an obviously corrupt failed state like Zimbabwe, and obviously murder is illegal in Oz, but there should be questions about whether that person is guilty.


Note that the act does not require Corby to have been convicted of the offense in question. So the fact that she was convicted in an Indonesia court is not crucial to the application of the act in this case.
Surely if it is to be "proceeds of a crime", then there should be a conviction in am honest court to show that a crime has been committed.

Desmond
14-02-2014, 05:26 PM
I don't think the condescending attitude to Indonesia's legal systems is all that useful.

Would it have been so different here?

Does anyone caught with drugs get off with the "that's not mine" excuse, or just young ladies with blue eyes?

Rincewind
14-02-2014, 08:18 PM
Well, someone could be convicted of murder, to use Pax' example, in an obviously corrupt failed state like Zimbabwe, and obviously murder is illegal in Oz, but there should be questions about whether that person is guilty.

The act doesn't require a conviction so the murder happened or not can be argued.


Surely if it is to be "proceeds of a crime", then there should be a conviction in am honest court to show that a crime has been committed.

The problem is you want to have your cake and eat it too. You require a conviction in an honest court but then claim that Indonesia cannot provide this. So if a sovereign country cannot be trusted to administer its own judicial system where do we draw the line? Are convictions in any foreign court untrustworthy or is there a list of Jono approved countries that need to be appended to the legislation?

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 12:57 AM
The act doesn't require a conviction so the murder happened or not can be argued.
In that case it's a crass act, because it could allow confiscation from people not proven guilty.


The problem is you want to have your cake and eat it too. You require a conviction in an honest court but then claim that Indonesia cannot provide this.
Indeed I do, because of their leniency on terrorists by comparison. There were too many irregularities in the Corby case in particular.


So if a sovereign country cannot be trusted to administer its own judicial system where do we draw the line? Are convictions in any foreign court untrustworthy or is there a list of Jono approved countries that need to be appended to the legislation?
Yes. But the easiest thing would be a requirement of a conviction in an Australian court or in a country that has an extradition treaty with Australia.

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 12:59 AM
I don't think the condescending attitude to Indonesia's legal systems is all that useful.
Yes it is. What is worse is endorsing a corrupt judicial system.


Would it have been so different here?
Even if convicted it wouldn't have been so harsh a sentence.


Does anyone caught with drugs get off with the "that's not mine" excuse, or just young ladies with blue eyes?
Everyone, especially when we know that drug smugglers use innocent dupes.

Patrick Byrom
15-02-2014, 02:43 AM
Yes. But the easiest thing would be a requirement of a conviction in an Australian court or in a country that has an extradition treaty with Australia.
You mean a country like Indonesia (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/dfat/treaties/1995/7.html)?

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 06:20 AM
You mean a country like Indonesia (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/dfat/treaties/1995/7.html)?
In that case, my standard was too lax. Consider this one from 2007:

INDONESIA
Lenient sentence for those who beheaded three Christian girls (http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Lenient-sentence-for-those-who-beheaded-three-Christian-girls-8791.html)
The three Islamist militants who masterminded and carried out the three murders in 2005 could have received the death penalty. Instead, they will spend between 14 and 20 years in prison. Hasanuddin, the brain behind the gruesome act, also wrote the notes left near the bodies in which he promised more Christian deaths.

Jakarta (AsiaNews) – Central Jakarta District Court Wednesday sentenced a Muslim militant to 20 years in prison for masterminding the gruesome murder of three Christian schoolgirls in the Central Sulawesi's town of Poso in 2005. The two men who killed the three girls and beheaded them were sentenced instead to 14 years in prison. Given the fact that all three Islamists could have received the death sentence the court’s decision is very lenient. The Indonesian press noted that the sentences corresponded to the demands of the prosecution.

Desmond
15-02-2014, 07:42 AM
Yes it is. What is worse is endorsing a corrupt judicial system.Do you have any evidence that corruption swayed the outcome of this case?


Even if convicted it wouldn't have been so harsh a sentence.I think we can argue about the sentence, though I don't know how relevant it is to the proceeds of crime discussion.

She was sentenced to 20 and served 9. If she had plead guilty she probably would have served less. In Australia as I understand it the penalty can be up to life imprisonment. Maybe not for that quantity, perhaps she would have got less time, but I think we are in the same ballpark.


Everyone, especially when we know that drug smugglers use innocent dupes.Sounds like an argument that could be made at trial. It doesn't mean everyone just gets acquitted.

Rincewind
15-02-2014, 08:41 AM
In that case it's a crass act, because it could allow confiscation from people not proven guilty.

Not at all. As you say standard vary with jurisdiction. The important thing is for the court here to be convinced that the person committed an indictable offence.


Yes. But the easiest thing would be a requirement of a conviction in an Australian court or in a country that has an extradition treaty with Australia.

Ok. Let's do that.

Extradition Treaty between Australia and the Republic of Indonesia (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/dfat/treaties/1995/7.html)

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 08:46 AM
Do try to keep up.

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 09:07 AM
I think we can argue about the sentence, though I don't know how relevant it is to the proceeds of crime discussion.

She was sentenced to 20 and served 9. If she had plead guilty she probably would have served less. In Australia as I understand it the penalty can be up to life imprisonment. Maybe not for that quantity, perhaps she would have got less time, but I think we are in the same ballpark.
Not for a soft drug she was accused of having.

Loosely related:
This Is America's Fastest-Growing Drug Problem (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/02/09/this-is-americas-fastest-growing-drug-problem.aspx)
By Sean Williams February 9, 2014

According to a National Drug Threat Survey (link opens a PDF) conducted by the Drug Enforcement Agency, the use of illicit substances in 2011 was actually down, but only marginally, to 8.7% of the population aged 12 years and older from 8.9% in 2010. The NDTA study notes that certain regions of the country deal with difficult challenges based on their location relative to Mexico, a country with weaker drug-trafficking enforcement. The study specifically notes that heroin infiltration from Mexico into the U.S. continues to be a serious problem in a number of regions.

What the report also notes is that the fastest-growing drug problem isn't even an illicit drug of all. With the exception of marijuana, which is still the most widely used illicit drug, controlled prescription drugs, or CPDs, represent by far the most rapidly growing drug problem we have in America.

Desmond
15-02-2014, 11:00 AM
Not for a soft drug she was accused of having. What's the maximum penalty for trafficking cannabis?

Rincewind
15-02-2014, 11:11 AM
Do try to keep up.

Amusing from the guy who had to be told Australia has an extradition treaty with Indonesia.

Capablanca-Fan
15-02-2014, 01:13 PM
You should keep up with the thread. I didn't realize that we would have extradition treaties with corruptocracies.

Rincewind
15-02-2014, 03:07 PM
No there are lots of facts you seem blissfully unaware of.

Adamski
16-02-2014, 09:59 PM
It is now clear that Schapelle would be in big trouble with the Indonesian authorities if she did a tv interview - paid or unpaid. Her parole terms include some weird provisions which son't allow her to do much.

Desmond
04-09-2017, 09:47 PM
Schapelle Corby applies for the dole as she lives the lush life of an Instagram celeb
(http://www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/schapelle-corby-applies-for-the-dole-as-she-lives-the-lush-life-of-an-instagram-celeb/news-story/e5ce20b1b4af5ad73c8124ab22dbc5e0)

CONVICTED drug smuggler Schapelle Corby has applied for the dole as she leads a life of leisure back home on the Gold Coast.

Highly-placed sources say Corby applied for Newstart payments about a month ago. Once approved, she will receive fortnightly payments of about $530 a fortnight but will have to look for work.

Corby has slipped comfortably back into the laid-back Gold Coast lifestyle since returning to Australia three months ago after almost 13 years behind bars and on parole in Bali.
...

MichaelBaron
04-09-2017, 11:54 PM
Schapelle Corby applies for the dole as she lives the lush life of an Instagram celeb
(http://www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/schapelle-corby-applies-for-the-dole-as-she-lives-the-lush-life-of-an-instagram-celeb/news-story/e5ce20b1b4af5ad73c8124ab22dbc5e0)

CONVICTED drug smuggler Schapelle Corby has applied for the dole as she leads a life of leisure back home on the Gold Coast.

Highly-placed sources say Corby applied for Newstart payments about a month ago. Once approved, she will receive fortnightly payments of about $530 a fortnight but will have to look for work.

Corby has slipped comfortably back into the laid-back Gold Coast lifestyle since returning to Australia three months ago after almost 13 years behind bars and on parole in Bali.
...

I trust she is searching for jobs...or else why would she get the dole...I also trust...the ''dole supporters'' on tis forum will agree that as a ''human being in need of money'' she is entitled to one...

Desmond
05-09-2017, 07:51 PM
I trust she is searching for jobs...or else why would she get the dole...
I wonder if there are any job going that can be done while pulling cones on the beach on the Goldie.

antichrist
13-04-2018, 09:59 PM
Not for a soft drug she was accused of having.

Loosely related:
This Is America's Fastest-Growing Drug Problem (http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/02/09/this-is-americas-fastest-growing-drug-problem.aspx)
By Sean Williams February 9, 2014

According to a National Drug Threat Survey (link opens a PDF) conducted by the Drug Enforcement Agency, the use of illicit substances in 2011 was actually down, but only marginally, to 8.7% of the population aged 12 years and older from 8.9% in 2010. The NDTA study notes that certain regions of the country deal with difficult challenges based on their location relative to Mexico, a country with weaker drug-trafficking enforcement. The study specifically notes that heroin infiltration from Mexico into the U.S. continues to be a serious problem in a number of regions.

What the report also notes is that the fastest-growing drug problem isn't even an illicit drug of all. With the exception of marijuana, which is still the most widely used illicit drug, controlled prescription drugs, or CPDs, represent by far the most rapidly growing drug problem we have in America.

so does Trump have a point here on Mexicans being drug runners or excessive drug runners? How do you say it without being racist?