PDA

View Full Version : The Bali nine



qpawn
15-02-2006, 12:52 PM
Though all of the sentences haven't been delivered the severity of them is clear. I say good riddance to these mass murderers for that is what a drug runner is: a scumbag who multiplies Martin Bryant's slaughter of 35 by any multiple. And these traffickers were so brazen as to strap heroin to their persons. I would give the whole lot life; I do not support the death penalty.

There has been emotive criticism of the AFP's role in their arrest, trial and in some cases certain execution. I have no problem with the AFP's actions. Surely, if mass murderers are trafficking drugs on Indonesian soil then the Indonesian police have a need and right to know. Correspondingly, the AFP had a duty to inform Indonesia of anything that was going on. Then it is the Indonesian's right to proceed as they wish. That's international law and soveriegnty whether the relatives of the Bali 9, for whom I have sympathy but not agreement about the AFP's role, like it or not.

Spiny Norman
15-02-2006, 02:20 PM
I think its a very, very sad situation ... but the law is the law (even when its an ass) ... the verdicts were always likely to be harsh, given the significant quantity of drugs being carried.

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 02:22 PM
I oppose the death penalty too but feel that the Australian Feds acted improperly in this case. I believe the have knowingly and negligently put the lives of Australians at risk by cooperating with the Indonesian police and not arresting them on Australian soil. I feel it is beyond the power vested in a public servant to make those sort of decisions. The ethical situation is similar to that of US agents arranging for terrorist suspects to be arrested and interrogated in countries where the police have rights to detain and 'vigorously' interrogate captives. Thoughts...

arosar
15-02-2006, 02:33 PM
I'm with you Barry on AFP role. I think that if there was some chance of arresting the crims here and, thus, trying them under our law, then we ought to have taken that route. That is, our government shouldn't so readily imperil the lives of its citizens.

But I also accept the sentences.

AR

pballard
15-02-2006, 03:01 PM
I oppose the death penalty too but feel that the Australian Feds acted improperly in this case. I believe the have knowingly and negligently put the lives of Australians at risk by cooperating with the Indonesian police and not arresting them on Australian soil.

But was that possible? I assume you mean arrest them when they got back to Oz with the heroin, because they could hardly arrest them on the way out. But IIRC, there were 5 on a plane (4 mules + Chan) and another 4 back in a hotel room. How could the AFP have arrested the latter 4?

Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious. I haven't followed this closely.

I oppose the death penalty too. But man, these guys were stupid.

Spiny Norman
15-02-2006, 04:02 PM
I oppose the death penalty too but feel that the Australian Feds acted improperly in this case. I believe the have knowingly and negligently put the lives of Australians at risk by cooperating with the Indonesian police and not arresting them on Australian soil. I feel it is beyond the power vested in a public servant to make those sort of decisions. The ethical situation is similar to that of US agents arranging for terrorist suspects to be arrested and interrogated in countries where the police have rights to detain and 'vigorously' interrogate captives. Thoughts...
Barry, lets look for a moment at the Feds other options:

1) if the Feds do nothing before the 9 leave (or whilst they're away) and do nothing when they return and if the 9 return with heroin ... kids die on our streets ... that's gross negligence

2) if the Feds do nothing before the 9 leave (or whilst they're away) and then try to catch them upon returning ... what if the 9 elude them (e.g. fly back into New Zealand then get a boat across the Tasman), bring heroin back, and some of our heroin-using kids die?

3) if the Feds do nothing before the 9 leave (or whilst they're away) and one of the 9 shoots someone dead trying to elude capture on their return (or whilst they're away)?

4) if the Feds arrest them before they leave and the 9 beat the charges (e.g. perhaps conspiracy to import a prohibited substance) ... then go right back to importing again at some other time

None of those options look particularly savoury to me either ...

PHAT
15-02-2006, 04:04 PM
There has been emotive criticism of the AFP's role in their arrest, ...

The Feds should have told them that thye will all be carity searched every time they come back into the country. They would not have gone.

All 9 will die by bullit or disease. The Feds effectively murdered 9 filthy scum. The 9 sets of familiesand friends of the filthy scum, should pool their resources and have the relevant Feds killed.

I do not support state sunctioned death penalty, but I do support rough justice when the those who perportedly uphold justice do not do so.

bergil
15-02-2006, 04:56 PM
I feel it is beyond the power vested in a public servant to make those sort of decisions. The ethical situation is similar to that of US agents arranging for terrorist suspects to be arrested and interrogated in countries where the police have rights to detain and 'vigorously' interrogate captives. Thoughts...
There is a difference as all terrorist suspects aren't all trying to blow up planes or have bombs strapped to themselves when detained, these kids were caught with the drugs on them in a country with the death penalty, no transfer involved.

No laws were broken in arresting these kids, it was a fair cop. Where as the detaining or Kidnapping of foreign citizens and 'vigorously' interrogating them is illegal.

I don't say they deserve death but if that's the penalty and they are guilty, then they have nobody but themselves to blame.

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 07:43 PM
4) if the Feds arrest them before they leave and the 9 beat the charges (e.g. perhaps conspiracy to import a prohibited substance) ... then go right back to importing again at some other time

This option seems the best and would serve the purpose. These are high-flying drug barons we're talking about here Frosty. They are mules mostly caught between a rock and a hard place. Arresting them for conspiracy to import and whether they are convicted or not it doesn't make an appreciable difference to the heroin on the street. This is the war on drugs, we're the good guys and we are not winning. However it would not have endangered the lives of our fellow citizens. My point is Australian civil SERVANTS should not be acting recklessly and endangering the lives of the citizens they are meant to SERVE. We outlawed the death penalty in this county 80+ years ago. This is a backward step.

I believe every effort should have been made for these people to be prosecuted in the Australian judicial system. If Ausralian law enforcement is picking and choosing the juristiction of an arrest to maximise the penalty, particularly to bring capital punishment into play then they are acting beyond the power invested in their position.

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 07:46 PM
But was that possible? I assume you mean arrest them when they got back to Oz with the heroin, because they could hardly arrest them on the way out. But IIRC, there were 5 on a plane (4 mules + Chan) and another 4 back in a hotel room. How could the AFP have arrested the latter 4?

Forgive me if I'm missing something obvious. I haven't followed this closely.

I oppose the death penalty too. But man, these guys were stupid.

Stupid or not Australian civil servants could have arrested them before heading out. They could have arrested some of them back in Australia again. They were specifically asked to have a word with one of them before they flew to Bali. They choose to not act and thereby endangered the lives of all 9. Doesn't it seem wrong for Australian civil servants to hand over their own citizens to foreign countries to kill?

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 07:51 PM
There is a difference as all terrorist suspects aren't all trying to blow up planes or have bombs strapped to themselves when detained, these kids were caught with the drugs on them in a country with the death penalty, no transfer involved.

No laws were broken in arresting these kids, it was a fair cop. Where as the detaining or Kidnapping of foreign citizens and 'vigorously' interrogating them is illegal.

I don't say they deserve death but if that's the penalty and they are guilty, then they have nobody but themselves to blame.

I'm not saynig that they should me given free entry to Mensa. My issue is with the mentality of the non-representative civil servant who decided to allow them to be arrested and prosecuted in Indonesia. They should have acted in Australia or made arrangements with te Indonesians to ensure they were captured by or handed over to the Australian police. We don't vote for civil servants they are unrepresentative of the Australian people and should not be making life and death decisions on Australian citizens. I'm proud of the fact that Australia does not have capital punishment and am abhorred by the Federal Police unaccountably exploiting this loophole.

PHAT
15-02-2006, 08:52 PM
My issue is with the mentality of the non-representative civil servant who decided to allow them to be arrested and prosecuted in Indonesia.

Too right! The AFP have allowed them to die.


[I am] abhorred by the Federal Police unaccountably exploiting this loophole.

If I was the shit who lied to to those parents, I would be forever thinking, "When will they come after me?"

And don't get me started on the disgraceful way we have abandonned David Hicks, Cornelia row et al.

Evil starts at the top - in every organisation.

McTaggart
15-02-2006, 09:31 PM
I am really really disappointed in the Indonesians. All those guys should have shot by now but instead we have had a useless trial with all the attendant publicity and now we have lots of hand-wringing and blame- shifting, its the AFP fault, no, its the Aust Govt.fault, Puu-leeze, give me a break! If this keeps up we will find the the Bali Nine are innocent dupes and should be extradited to Aussi-land and be given counselling. qpawn has got it right,they are nothing but murderous scum and far from feeling sorry for them we should be both angry that they are still alive and happy that the Indos caught them and not us as the Indons will have to wear the cost of keeping them. It is estimated that it costs the Australian public about $60,000 per prisoner per year to keep in prison and multiply that by 9 x say 10 years and you have the savings that we have made...Actually, include Corby and we are really saving big time. I am willing to bet that the Indons will get so pissed-off with carrying the cost that they will put their hands out for help....In China the rellos get billed for the bullet and any other attendant costs if an execution is imposed. So you can see that the Aus.Public servant, who dobbed the creeps in, really did us a public service. Now it is complicated by the fact some of them got life. They are going to spend the rest of their lives in a grotty Indo prison, not like our lovely prisons. I was told by a Russian crim,no,not Gaft, that we are crazy,our prisons are like rest homes etc.he just could not believe it, it was so nice compared to the ones he used to frequent back in old Mother Russia.
Like I said on another thread, if you are going to smuggle drugs in/through/from Asian countries you really have to do your homework and weigh up the risks. To sum up, I am sorry that they did not all get shot and I am happy that they got caught in another country,with or with-out the AFP's help, because we don't have to pay for the upkeep of their sorry asses...Yes, yes,I know the MR Bigs did not get caught etc but if this keeps up, it is going to be that little bit harder to recruit new idiots to do the job.

Southpaw Jim
15-02-2006, 09:50 PM
I don't believe anyone deserves the death penalty, but either the mules were grossly stupid/naive, or were greedy and took a risk for which they were aware of the consequences. I'm not sure I feel sorry for the 2 ringleaders anyway - I'm sure they'd have been quick to dole out rough justice to any mule who decided to back out of the deal.

As for the AFP - if we found out that the Indo authorities knew of criminal activity occurring in Australia (drugs, terrorism, whatever) and didn't inform us, there'd be outrage. The AFP did what they were bound by protocol and procedure to do. Sad, but unavoidable.

It's not the AFP's fault these idiots chose to break the law of a country with the death penalty.

pballard
15-02-2006, 09:54 PM
Stupid or not Australian civil servants could have arrested them before heading out.

Arrested for what? I doubt they'd get a prosecution. (I'm not a lawyer, that's just a gut feel).


They could have arrested some of them back in Australia again.

That's more reasonable, but would that have caught all 9? Weren't 4 of them back in a hotel room preparing the stuff? Or if the first 5 were caught, maybe the second 4 would've bolted. Plus, capturing them closer to the source gives a better chance of catching more people (i.e. the people they got the drugs from). In fact maybe that's what happened. Would they have got the 2 ringleaders if the arrests had happened in Oz?



They were specifically asked to have a word with one of them before they flew to Bali. They choose to not act and thereby endangered the lives of all 9. Doesn't it seem wrong for Australian civil servants to hand over their own citizens to foreign countries to kill?

A case can be made for refusing to deal with countries at all sorts of levels for all sorts of reasons. Generally we do anyway for pragmatic reasons. (Not that I necessarily agree). Perhaps that was the case here: if they don't share intelligence with the Indonesians, there's less chance of the drugs + carriers being caught, plus less (zero) of catching the people upstream.

My guess is that if they (AFP) refuse to co-operate with the Indonesians, then more drugs get into the country. So it's either let more drugs into the country, or let the occasional drug courier face the death penalty. Neither is satisfactory, but the current policy seems to be that the latter is the least bad.

That's just my thoughts. I really don't have strong opinions on this. There are far greater problems in the world than the Bali nine.

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 10:39 PM
Arrested for what? I doubt they'd get a prosecution. (I'm not a lawyer, that's just a gut feel).

Conspiracy to import drugs. I believe it is against the law.


That's more reasonable, but would that have caught all 9? Weren't 4 of them back in a hotel room preparing the stuff? Or if the first 5 were caught, maybe the second 4 would've bolted. Plus, capturing them closer to the source gives a better chance of catching more people (i.e. the people they got the drugs from). In fact maybe that's what happened. Would they have got the 2 ringleaders if the arrests had happened in Oz?

They should have been trying to maximise the arrests this country. I agree that if you are arrested in Indonesia then that is fine but if yu are being tracked by Austrlian Federal Police who then pass information to the Indonesians to assist in you being arrested in a country with the death penalty then that is an atrocity.


A case can be made for refusing to deal with countries at all sorts of levels for all sorts of reasons. Generally we do anyway for pragmatic reasons. (Not that I necessarily agree). Perhaps that was the case here: if they don't share intelligence with the Indonesians, there's less chance of the drugs + carriers being caught, plus less (zero) of catching the people upstream.

My guess is that if they (AFP) refuse to co-operate with the Indonesians, then more drugs get into the country. So it's either let more drugs into the country, or let the occasional drug courier face the death penalty. Neither is satisfactory, but the current policy seems to be that the latter is the least bad.

That's just my thoughts. I really don't have strong opinions on this. There are far greater problems in the world than the Bali nine.

There is nothnig wrong with them cooperating with the Indonesians, provided they are not maximising the arrests taking plavce in Indonesia, particularly the arrest of Australians. Could they have extradition treaties for nationals arrested as part of joint operations (which this may be classified as)?

Rincewind
15-02-2006, 10:47 PM
As for the AFP - if we found out that the Indo authorities knew of criminal activity occurring in Australia (drugs, terrorism, whatever) and didn't inform us, there'd be outrage. The AFP did what they were bound by protocol and procedure to do. Sad, but unavoidable.

Not at all. The AFP had some evidence on them, they could have arrested on Australian soil on charges of conspiring to import drugs. They chose to let them take their chances in Indo and pointed the Indo police at them.

It's like saying the person who shots someone did not kill them, it was the bullet which did that and anyway it was they own fault for getting in the line of fire.

Davidflude
15-02-2006, 11:00 PM
I have actually rang the rozzers when I saw heroin dealers in my suburb. I got the sort of answer you would want. "The undercover cops are already in the area"

Since then the dealers have been cleaned out. The forces of law and order have a quick test. If the chemist is handing out lots of methadone and no needles then
the situation is under control. On the other hand if the chemist starts habding out needles then they take action.

I am against the death penalty because there are mistakes. I ask anyone who believes in the death penalty "would you have executed Lindy Chamberlain?".

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 12:45 AM
Though all of the sentences haven't been delivered the severity of them is clear. I say good riddance to these mass murderers for that is what a drug runner is: a scumbag who multiplies Martin Bryant's slaughter of 35 by any multiple. And these traffickers were so brazen as to strap heroin to their persons. I would give the whole lot life; I do not support the death penalty.

There is a monumental difference between someone who murders complete innocents the way our Mr Bryant did and someone who deals a product that those consensually using, or who have developed an addiction from consensual use, may sometimes die from. To say they are murderers is like saying car companies are murderers for making cars that people might crash.

Also, while SE Asian judges and defenders of the death penalty love to say the stuff could have killed huge numbers of people, that is typically based on the assumption that every hit produces an overdose, or on other greatly inflated estimates of the death rate. They may say there was enough to kill 8000 people or whatever - in reality it would have been few or none. The real killers are the governments who by brutally repressing drug use drive it underground, encouraging unsafe practices, lack of education, and crimes relating to the illegality-inflated costs and profits of drugs.

All the above said, anyone who goes trafficking drugs to a country where severe sentences exist is taking a very big risk and it shouldn't be our job to grovel for their release. And if we're going to oppose the DP we should do it consistently and not just whenever one of our own is facing it. So I shan't be lifting a finger or signing a petition to save these dupes, even though I find the death penalty intellectually unjustified and emotionally repugnant. Actually "repugnant" isn't a strong enough word. Something like "morbidly offensive" perhaps.

Yikes. More leftie propaganda from me this fine evening. :eek:

bergil
16-02-2006, 03:04 AM
There is a monumental difference between someone who murders complete innocents the way our Mr Bryant did and someone who deals a product that those consensually using, or who have developed an addiction from consensual use, may sometimes die from. To say they are murderers is like saying car companies are murderers for making cars that people might crash.
Agreed not even close


Also, while SE Asian judges and defenders of the death penalty love to say the stuff could have killed huge numbers of people, that is typically based on the assumption that every hit produces an overdose, or on other greatly inflated estimates of the death rate. They may say there was enough to kill 8000 people or whatever - in reality it would have been few or none.
Agreed


The real killers are the governments who by brutally repressing drug use drive it underground, encouraging unsafe practices, lack of education, and crimes relating to the illegality-inflated costs and profits of drugs.
Are you saying you'd like tha Australian Federal Government to sell or distribute any drugs no questions asked? :confused:


All the above said, anyone who goes trafficking drugs to a country where severe sentences exist is taking a very big risk and it shouldn't be our job to grovel for their release.
Dead right! :rolleyes:


Yikes. More leftie propaganda from me this fine evening. :eek:
Agreed :P

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 03:24 AM
Are you saying you'd like tha Australian Federal Government to sell or distribute any drugs no questions asked? :confused:

Hmmm. I'm open to the concept. :P

No, seriously, since this is important, I reckon the appropriate approach for most drugs is legalisation under very heavy regulation.

By the way, I don't use, or encourage use of, any of the currently illegal drugs. I just think that trying to coercively police them tends to be needlessly illiberal and creates more problems than it solves.

bergil
16-02-2006, 03:35 AM
No, seriously, since this is important, I reckon the appropriate approach for most drugs is legalisation under very heavy regulation.
And there will always be those who will try to circumvent or corrupt those regulations to make a profit or get high. So around we go again.


By the way, I don't use, or encourage use of, any of the currently illegal drugs.
Are you sure? :P

bergil
16-02-2006, 03:54 AM
I'm not saynig that they should me given free entry to Mensa.

:clap:


My issue is with the mentality of the non-representative civil servant who decided to allow them to be arrested and prosecuted in Indonesia. They should have acted in Australia or made arrangements with te Indonesians to ensure they were captured by or handed over to the Australian police.
Hang on, do not the "non-representative civil servants" in the Police, Fire, Ambulance, SES and Doctors all make life and death decisions? What would you have them do sit on their hands?


We don't vote for civil servants they are unrepresentative of the Australian people and should not be making life and death decisions on Australian citizens.
How are they unrepresentative of the Australian people? Are they not Australian citizens?:hmm:


I'm proud of the fact that Australia does not have capital punishment and am abhorred by the Federal Police unaccountably exploiting this loophole.
I'm happy for it to stay that way but don't blame AFP for those monkeys crimes.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 06:09 AM
My point is Australian civil SERVANTS should not be acting recklessly and endangering the lives of the citizens they are meant to SERVE.
So lets take all the guns away from our police ... and we'd better put them on bicycles instead of in cars, just in case they run us down by mistake.

You have claimed reckless behaviour in respect of the federal police, yet I have seen nothing here that would support that claim. You might not agree with their decision (and I support your right to disagree), but just disagreeing doesn't make it reckless.

How exactly were they reckless? Is there evidence that they made the decision to notify the Indonesians without any thought, or that they ignored the likelihood that the 9 would be arrested in Bali as a result? That would be reckless I suppose, but I haven't seen that either alleged or supported with evidence.

The complaints that I have seen about the AFP is that some people don't like the consequences of the AFPs actions and therefore wish that the AFP made different decisions.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 06:11 AM
Yikes. More leftie propaganda from me this fine evening. :eek:
You're on fire KB! ;)

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 07:05 AM
Hang on, do not the "non-representative civil servants" in the Police, Fire, Ambulance, SES and Doctors all make life and death decisions? What would you have them do sit on their hands?

The point is they are trying to save or protect lives. Drug trafficking is not a capital offense in Australia. In fact NO crime is a capital offense in Australia. The feds should not try to exploit a loophole by conveniently arranging the arrest of Australian citizens overseas by delivery them into the hands of the Indo police.


How are they unrepresentative of the Australian people? Are they not Australian citizens?:hmm:

By unrepresentative, I mean no one voted for them and they are not accountable to the Australian people. If Howard or some minister made the decision then there would be stronger grounds for its validity (although I would still oppose it).


I'm happy for it to stay that way but don't blame AFP for those monkeys crimes.

No they didn't tell them to carry the smack but that was about the only thing they didn't do.

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 07:08 AM
So lets take all the guns away from our police ... and we'd better put them on bicycles instead of in cars, just in case they run us down by mistake.

You have claimed reckless behaviour in respect of the federal police, yet I have seen nothing here that would support that claim. You might not agree with their decision (and I support your right to disagree), but just disagreeing doesn't make it reckless.

How exactly were they reckless? Is there evidence that they made the decision to notify the Indonesians without any thought, or that they ignored the likelihood that the 9 would be arrested in Bali as a result? That would be reckless I suppose, but I haven't seen that either alleged or supported with evidence.

The complaints that I have seen about the AFP is that some people don't like the consequences of the AFPs actions and therefore wish that the AFP made different decisions.

Your straw man might keep the crows away but that is the only thing for which it is useful.

It was reckless because the the a party to arranging the arrest of Australian citizens by a foreign power by assisting that foreign power's police force. This forced those Australians to be prosecuted in a system which habitually delivers the death sentence for the kind of charges likely to be laid against these Australians.

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 07:14 AM
I have actually rang the rozzers when I saw heroin dealers in my suburb. I got the sort of answer you would want. "The undercover cops are already in the area"

Since then the dealers have been cleaned out. The forces of law and order have a quick test. If the chemist is handing out lots of methadone and no needles then
the situation is under control. On the other hand if the chemist starts habding out needles then they take action.

I am against the death penalty because there are mistakes. I ask anyone who believes in the death penalty "would you have executed Lindy Chamberlain?".

I don't oppose the death penalty because mistakes can be made. That is a valid point but a pretty asinine one. The real issue is I oppose giving the power to the state to take the life of one of its citizens. That is just not part of the game.

People commit crimes for all sorts of reasons and the state needs to address the reason why people commit crime not just run the state to one set of rules and exterminate all those who don't fit in.

Drug trafficking is a prime example. Most people who are executed for drug crimes world-wide have a serious health issue which is not being addressed mainly because it is too hard a problem and the pharmaceutical, tabacco and alchohol companies have too much power.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 07:44 AM
It was reckless because ... arranging the arrest of Australian citizens by a foreign power ...
Is this true? Or did they supply information that said "we think these guys are up to no good, we thing they're going to smuggle drugs, but we don't have enough evidence to arrest them here"?

If there is evidence that they arranged the arrests, please supply it. I haven't seen any of the TV programs that others here seem to have seen. What is this evidence?

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 07:57 AM
Is this true? Or did they supply information that said "we think these guys are up to no good, we thing they're going to smuggle drugs, but we don't have enough evidence to arrest them here"?

The phrase "don't have enough evidence to arrest them" is not black and white. It is a matter of degrees. I'm sure they had enough evidence to arrest them Obviously they had less evidence than catching them with the drugs on them and so the chances of a conviction was reduced. However, that should be tested in the courts.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 08:10 AM
... I'm sure they had enough evidence to arrest them ...
How are you sure? On the basis of what you saw on TV?

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 08:22 AM
How are you sure? On the basis of what you saw on TV?

They had information to pass on to the Indonesian police. They were aware that one of the nine was suspected to have been up to no good by his own family. They could have arrested before they left or waited till they returned and arrested there or if they cooperated with the Indonesian police it should be done on the understanding that efforts will be made to have the Australians processed through the Australian judicial system.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 08:41 AM
They had information to pass on to the Indonesian police. They were aware that one of the nine was suspected to have been up to no good by his own family. They could have arrested before they left or waited till they returned and arrested there or if they cooperated with the Indonesian police it should be done on the understanding that efforts will be made to have the Australians processed through the Australian judicial system.
That's really not answering my question ...

pballard
16-02-2006, 09:38 AM
They should have been trying to maximise the arrests this country.


Even if that means less arrests overall?

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 09:41 AM
That's really not answering my question ...

In that case your question was misformed. The federal police had information which they shared with the Indonesian police. They were also informed by the relaitives of one of the nine they they believed their son lack the resources (and passport) for a trip to Bali they heard about via a recorded telephone message. This was reported in the media and if true all this constitutes evidence.

The question is what is appropriate use of this evidence by the Federal Police?

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 09:45 AM
Even if that means less arrests overall?

Yes. I believe it is unethically for the Australian Fed to be handing over Australian citizens to be prosecuted in foreign judicial systems when that judicial system regularly hands down the death penalty for the charges which those citizens were likely to face. It is tantamount to the Australian Feds seeking the death penalty by other means.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 10:04 AM
In that case your question was misformed.
I'll be the judge of that ... ;)

bergil
16-02-2006, 10:21 AM
The point is they are trying to save or protect lives. Drug trafficking is not a capital offense in Australia. In fact NO crime is a capital offense in Australia. The feds should not try to exploit a loophole by conveniently arranging the arrest of Australian citizens overseas by delivery them into the hands of the Indo police.
Yes and they did, they stopped drugs from illegally entering Australia and endangering the population. If you commit a crime in another country then you must face their justice or don't do it. :wall:


By unrepresentative, I mean no one voted for them and they are not accountable to the Australian people. If Howard or some minister made the decision then there would be stronger grounds for its validity (although I would still oppose it).
So nobody voted for them, look at the monkeys we get when we do.:doh: They AFP are accountable to the law, which our representavies swill make.



No they didn't tell them to carry the smack but that was about the only thing they didn't do.
Sob :(

bergil
16-02-2006, 10:53 AM
We outlawed the death penalty in this county 80+ years ago.
That is wrong it was 21 years ago and Ronald Ryan in 1967 was the last person executed.

Jurisdiction
Queensland, Last execution 1913, Abolition 1922
New South Wales, Last execution 1940 Abolition 1985
Tasmania, Last execution 1946 Abolition 1968
Commonwealth, Last execution nil Abolition1973
ACT, Last execution nil Abolition1973
Northern Territory, Last execution 1952 Abolition 1973
Victoria, Last execution 1967 Abolition 1975
South Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1976
Western Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1984

Alan Shore
16-02-2006, 10:53 AM
I read one of them (I think Scott Rush) had been involved in drugs before but just slapped on the wrist. If he had of been properly dealt realistic consequences for his actions then, then he may not have continued on to face a situation where the consequences are comparatively excessive.

EGOR
16-02-2006, 11:06 AM
That is wrong it was 21 years ago and Ronald Ryan in 1967 was the last person executed.

Jurisdiction
Queensland, Last execution 1913, Abolition 1922
New South Wales, Last execution 1940 Abolition 1985
Tasmania, Last execution 1946 Abolition 1968
Commonwealth, Last execution nil Abolition1973
ACT, Last execution nil Abolition1973
Northern Territory, Last execution 1952 Abolition 1973
Victoria, Last execution 1967 Abolition 1975
South Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1976
Western Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1984
I love pedantic people!:D

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 11:42 AM
That is wrong it was 21 years ago and Ronald Ryan in 1967 was the last person executed.

Jurisdiction
Queensland, Last execution 1913, Abolition 1922
New South Wales, Last execution 1940 Abolition 1985
Tasmania, Last execution 1946 Abolition 1968
Commonwealth, Last execution nil Abolition1973
ACT, Last execution nil Abolition1973
Northern Territory, Last execution 1952 Abolition 1973
Victoria, Last execution 1967 Abolition 1975
South Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1976
Western Australia, Last execution 1964 Abolition 1984

I was roughly aware of the Queensland date of abolition and thought that was representative. I stand corrected. However it makes no material difference to the argument.

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 11:46 AM
Yes and they did, they stopped drugs from illegally entering Australia and endangering the population. If you commit a crime in another country then you must face their justice or don't do it. :wall:

I'm not saying that. What I am questioning is the protocol which allows civil servants to make decisions which endanger the lives of Austalians. In Australia we do not allow civil servants or elected representatives to take the lives of our citizens. However we seem to have no qualms in having our civil servants deliver our citizens to foreign powers to do that dirty work for us.


So nobody voted for them, look at the monkeys we get when we do.:doh: They AFP are accountable to the law, which our representavies swill make.

Your argument then is then basically you prefer a system where a civil servant can condemn you to death?

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 12:17 PM
And there will always be those who will try to circumvent or corrupt those regulations to make a profit or get high. So around we go again.

Nothing like the same problem. The supply of many dangerous drugs to medical patients is successfully handled through regulation with only rare instances of sloppy practice. With drugs legal but regulated, the incentive to produce them illegally is much lower because the price you are competing with is much cheaper.

If people kill themselves through dodgy backyard jobs when the drug is commercially available at a reasonable price, that's their own stupid fault.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 12:26 PM
Your argument then is then basically you prefer a system where a civil servant can condemn you to death?
He said no such thing ... :hand:

bergil
16-02-2006, 12:33 PM
I'm not saying that. What I am questioning is the protocol which allows civil servants to make decisions which endanger the lives of Austalians. In Australia we do not allow civil servants or elected representatives to take the lives of our citizens. However we seem to have no qualms in having our civil servants deliver our citizens to foreign powers to do that dirty work for us.

Sure question it but don't lay blame on AFP for the Indonesian justice system penalties or those nine people for their crimes.



Your argument then is then basically you prefer a system where a civil servant can condemn you to death?
No you said they weren't accountable, they are.

firegoat7
16-02-2006, 12:35 PM
This thread is a circus. Hasn't anyone got something better to rage against then some petty economical criminals.

cheers Fg7

bergil
16-02-2006, 12:40 PM
Nothing like the same problem. The supply of many dangerous drugs to medical patients is successfully handled through regulation with only rare instances of sloppy practice. With drugs legal but regulated, the incentive to produce them illegally is much lower because the price you are competing with is much cheaper.
Maybe, maybe not.

If people kill themselves through dodgy backyard jobs when the drug is commercially available at a reasonable price, that's their own stupid fault.
And those that are killing themselves with higher priced illegal dodgy backyard drugs now?

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 12:59 PM
He said no such thing ... :hand:

Yes he did. Ner ner de ner ner. Sorry if you want to engage in nay saying you will reap what you sow.

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 01:04 PM
Sure question it but don't lay blame on AFP for the Indonesian justice system penalties or those nine people for their crimes.

What I'm saying is that we should not be assisting a foreign power to persecute our citizens where the crime is one such that the likely penalty is capital.


No you said they weren't accountable, they are.

Not directly to the people and therefore their personal standards, personalities and ethics are not open to the same degree of scrutiny as we allow on our elected representatives. This is why they should not have the power to deliver our citizens to a foreign power to execute. I don't want anyone making that decision but if we must have someone then it should be someone we can reasonably know something about and who we can get sacked if they stuff up.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 01:13 PM
Sorry if you want to engage in nay saying you will reap what you sow.
Everyone can see clearly what he wrote. And it wasn't what you said that he said. So I'll say it again: "Nay" :whistle:


[from deleted post-mod] 9 people die because of drugs, money, police and idiology, and you want to object to the word [deleted-mod] I have one word for you: Proportion
I think its you that got your proportions wrong when you said "9 people die ...".

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 01:19 PM
Everyone can see clearly what he wrote. And it wasn't what you said that he said. So I'll say it again: "Nay" :whistle:

As you are not contributing to the argument then you would better serve the debate by lowering the noise coefficient.

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 01:21 PM
And those that are killing themselves with higher priced illegal dodgy backyard drugs now?

They are doing so because there is no alternative that is quality-controlled and affordable - a situation that again stems from the illegality of the drugs in question.

Legalise and the problem becomes like homemade vodka. Every now and then someone kills themselves on some dodgy spirit homebrew they've made to avoid paying market prices, but in Australia it's a very marginal issue.

PHAT
16-02-2006, 01:31 PM
Yes, 9 people die. 2 will die from bullits, 7 prematurely from disease in a hole not fit for for pets.

And listen to this at this peak pig.


Commissioner Mick Keelty says the AFP acted in Australia's best interests.

"It was only through the efforts of the Indonesian national police conducting the operation in Indonesia that the larger number of suspects became known," he said.

"So the AFP doesn't need to feel vindicated. We have acted lawfully.

"We have acted morally and it is the day-to-day business of the AFP... because our interest is protecting the lives of all Australians."

Keelty: would you want him looking after your interests during a scrap with the pigs outside Australia? No?

Those 9 were scum, but they are OUR scum, and we should deal with them in OUR way - not immorally truck them out to be killed by outsourcing to another justice system.

Keelty: hang your head in shame.:evil:

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 01:34 PM
Moderators: Why was my post #55 deleted?

PHAT
16-02-2006, 01:36 PM
Moderators: Why was my post #55 deleted?

And mine too?

Heavy handed language NAZIS.

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 01:44 PM
See moderation decisions thread. I should note that Frosty was the one who pulled firegoat into line but if you see swearing and want to comment on it please don't quote it because that creates hassles for the mods who have to go and edit it from your quote and quotes of your quote as well. Any further discussion of this in non-chess or feedback or via PM thanks.

bergil
16-02-2006, 01:45 PM
Yes, 9 people die. 2 will die from bullits, 7 prematurely from disease in a hole not fit for for pets.

And listen to this at this peak pig.



Keelty: would you want him looking after your interests during a scrap with the pigs outside Australia? No?

Those 9 were scum, but they are OUR scum, and we should deal with them in OUR way - not immorally truck them out to be killed by outsourcing to another justice system.

Keelty: hang your head in shame.:evil:
Our scum committed crimes in another country (Indonesia) so most of them (7 out of 9) get to stay in their jails. That's what happens when you do naughty naughty things in other places, did that help you Santas Little Helper?

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 01:53 PM
Yes he did. Ner ner de ner ner. Sorry if you want to engage in nay saying you will reap what you sow.
I was going to repost my reply and invite you to repost yours too ... but I can't be bothered, life is too short! ;)

PHAT
16-02-2006, 01:53 PM
Our scum committed crimes in another country (Indonesia) so most of them (7 out of 9) get to stay in their jails. That's what happens when you do naughty naughty thing in other places, did that help you santas little helper?

They conspired to import drugs before they left Australia. Their first crime was here there their second crime over there. We should have got them first. The maggots in the AFP out-sourced our whole criminal justice system.

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 01:54 PM
... if you see swearing and want to comment on it please don't quote it because that creates hassles for the mods who have to go and edit it from your quote and quotes of your quote as well.
Sorry ... my bad ...

bergil
16-02-2006, 01:54 PM
I was going to repost my reply and invite you to repost yours too ... but I can't be bothered, life is too short! ;)
I was trying to quote it but feel the same now.:D

bergil
16-02-2006, 01:58 PM
They conspired to import drugs before they left Australia. Their first crime was here there their second crime over there. We should have got them first. The maggots in the AFP out-sourced our whole criminal justice system.
What evidence do you have that they could they make the charges stick and get a conviction?

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 02:00 PM
Restored Frosty's post in slightly modified form and Rincewind's reply as most of these two posts concerned a debate that was going before the swearing incident.

bergil
16-02-2006, 02:01 PM
Heavy handed language NAZIS.
The pot calling the kettle black!! :owned:

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 02:03 PM
Hey Rincewind ... the posts are back (thanks KB) ... we could start arguing again ... :eek:

bergil
16-02-2006, 02:05 PM
Hey Rincewind ... the posts are back (thanks KB) ... we could start arguing again ... :eek:
There was another one by Rincewind that's not there anymore or did he delete it?

Spiny Norman
16-02-2006, 02:06 PM
There was another one by Rincewind that's not there anymore or did he delete it?
His reply to my "Nay" is there ... that's enough for me. ;)

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 02:07 PM
There was another one by Rincewind that's not there anymore or did he delete it?

Kevin did but I can't see anything wrong with it so I have restored. But the mods can feel free to delete it again if I have done something bad.

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 02:12 PM
Kevin did but I can't see anything wrong with it so I have restored. But the mods can feel free to delete it again if I have done something bad.

May have deleted one I didn't intend to by accident.

bergil
16-02-2006, 02:18 PM
May have deleted one I didn't intend to by accident.
And the picture of Firegoat?

Kevin Bonham
16-02-2006, 02:26 PM
And the picture of Firegoat?

Bit dodgy worksafety-wise. Would be fine as a link with a mild disclaimer.

firegoat7
16-02-2006, 02:30 PM
Our scum committed crimes in another country (Indonesia) so most of them (7 out of 9) get to stay in their jails. I don't think it is reasonable to call these people scum.....foolish yes, but scum...nope.:hand:


cheers fg7

bergil
16-02-2006, 02:36 PM
I don't think it is reasonable to call these people scum.....foolish yes, but scum...nope.:hand:


cheers fg7
I agree I was using your pal Matt's language in a sarcastic post. Why did you not chip him about it? :hmm: Just another example of the double standard twins!:owned:

McTaggart
16-02-2006, 02:51 PM
He he, see, I told you there would be lots of hand-wringing and blame-shifting, I still think my idea of taking the bastards out the back door (Serbian style),never to be seen again is still the best solution. The Indons chickened out,the Serbs and Croats would never. ah well,now 7 get a chance to rot away in grotty hole for the rest of their life. Wait,wait, I have another solution that might keep the bleeding hearts happy,why not buy our crims back? I bet no-one has ever thought of that before. We all know that the Indons are a corrupt lot and money is the bottom line there, so say, $2,000,000. should do it,I mean, afterall we sent Saddam Hussein $300,000,000. it would be really chicken feed.. Sometimes I think I am brilliant but it only lasts for a fleeting moment. but I do like Rincewind's idea about state extermination. Hmm, needs a little bit of thought but it might work.....Our morally-bereft Government would have no trouble coming at this. I must look up how to get in contact with little Johnnie or Dopey Downer....

Rincewind
16-02-2006, 06:05 PM
Thanks for that insightful and well thought out post, McTaggart.

Anyway, just to recap on what Justice Finn found when he was asked to rule in the illegality of the AFP tipping off the Indonesian police (as claim which was dismissed as it was decided it had no basis for argument in law) he added the following comment to his decision

"There is a need for the minister administering the Australian Federal Police Act, 1979, and the Commissioner of Police to address the procedures and protocols followed by members of the AFP when providing information to the police forces of another country in circumstances which predictably could result in the charging of a person with an offence that would expose that person to the risk of the death penalty in that country. Especially is this so where the person concerned is an Australian citizen."

Let's hope that happens. I don't believe the federal court has any authority to actually enforce such a review.

PHAT
16-02-2006, 09:19 PM
What evidence do you have that they could they make the charges stick and get a conviction?

You don't need "enough evidence". you only need enough to put them in front of the beak. That makes them marked, even if nothing sticks. They could not get in or out of the country without a drug niffin' dog nosing thier arse.

PHAT
16-02-2006, 09:26 PM
I don't think it is reasonable to call these people scum.....foolish yes, but scum...nope.:hand:


cheers fg7

Oh yes, they are scum. Here is the "Scum Test."

Would you want your children to marry anyone like them? :owned:

Yep, they're scum.

PHAT
16-02-2006, 09:35 PM
Just another example of the double standard twins!:owned:

Naaa. On this BB, we who have doubled standards, wins.

McTaggart
17-02-2006, 07:06 AM
Oh yes, they are scum. Here is the "Scum Test."

Would you want your children to marry anyone like them? :owned:

Yep, they're scum.


Nice one Matt,that would really get their middle-class mores into a tangle.

PHAT
17-02-2006, 07:26 AM
Nice one Matt,that would really get their middle-class mores into a tangle.

Bollocks. It is nothing to do with class. Scum exist in all straters of society. The working class has its drug runners, the middle class has its lawyers, and the ruling class has itself.

McTaggart
17-02-2006, 09:25 AM
I totally agree Matt, I was referring to the middle class mores of the posters!