Schapelle Corby sucked alot of Indo cock to get her drug case re-opened.

[\- Prof. Jonez©\]

Defence to call up baggage handlers

By CINDY WOCKNER in Bali

July 5, 2005

TWO prisoners, baggage handlers and even the chief of the Bali drug squad are
among the 12 witnesses Schapelle Corby is banking on to get her out of jail.


The Denpasar High Court's decision to grant a "putusan sela" or re-opening of
the District Court trial comes a week after the defence and prosecution appeals
were forwarded to the court.

It involves the original court reopening the case to hear additional witnesses
who were not heard at the first trial.


The defence had sought, as part of its appeal against the conviction and 20-year
sentence, not just for the case to be considered as a traditional appeal but
also for the case to be reopened.


The High Court has appointed three judges to deal with the case, among them
Chief judge, Gusti Made Lingga.


Part of the defence submission had been that it was possible witnesses in
Australia, such as two Victorian prisoners, could shed light on defence claims
the drugs were planted in Ms Corby's bag.


Whilst not expressing any view either way on this, Judge Lingga said it was
appropriate that the court hear this testimony before a final appeal decision is
made.


Under the rules, Corby's new case must be heard within three months.


But responsibility for getting the witnesses to court lays with the defence –
who the court says must fund their travel to Bali and leap any bureaucratic
hurdles.


The decision, only one week after the court received the appeal documents, came
as a shock to everyone involved, including Ms Corby's lawyers.


The court had many months to consider the appeal.


Heartening for the Corby team is the news Judge Lingga has, in the past, ordered
the acquittal of a drug suspect on appeal – when he was on duty in Kalimantan
province.


Last night, a spokeswoman for Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock said Australian
authorities had received no formal request from the Indonesian Government in
relation to the new court hearings.


However the spokeswoman said the Government would do everything it possibly
could within the bounds of agreements already in place.


"At this stage we are not quite sure what is being requested but any request
would need to come from the Indonesian Government," the spokesman said.


She said if Australian prisoners were formally asked to give evidence the
Government could help as they did with Corby witness, Victorian prisoner John
Ford.

[Don H]

" "- Prof. Jonez©"" <jonez@norcom.ca> wrote in message
news:PTdye.37$8h6.4003@news.uswest.net...
> Defence to call up baggage handlers
>
> By CINDY WOCKNER in Bali
>
> July 5, 2005
>
> TWO prisoners, baggage handlers and even the chief of the Bali drug squad
are
> among the 12 witnesses Schapelle Corby is banking on to get her out of
jail.
>
>
> The Denpasar High Court's decision to grant a "putusan sela" or re-opening
of
> the District Court trial comes a week after the defence and prosecution
appeals
> were forwarded to the court.
>
> It involves the original court reopening the case to hear additional
witnesses
> who were not heard at the first trial.
>
>
> The defence had sought, as part of its appeal against the conviction and
20-year
> sentence, not just for the case to be considered as a traditional appeal
but
> also for the case to be reopened.
>
>
> The High Court has appointed three judges to deal with the case, among
them
> Chief judge, Gusti Made Lingga.
>
>
> Part of the defence submission had been that it was possible witnesses in
> Australia, such as two Victorian prisoners, could shed light on defence
claims
> the drugs were planted in Ms Corby's bag.
>
>
> Whilst not expressing any view either way on this, Judge Lingga said it
was
> appropriate that the court hear this testimony before a final appeal
decision is
> made.
>
>
> Under the rules, Corby's new case must be heard within three months.
>
>
> But responsibility for getting the witnesses to court lays with the
defence -
> who the court says must fund their travel to Bali and leap any
bureaucratic
> hurdles.
>
>
> The decision, only one week after the court received the appeal documents,
came
> as a shock to everyone involved, including Ms Corby's lawyers.
>
>
> The court had many months to consider the appeal.
>
>
> Heartening for the Corby team is the news Judge Lingga has, in the past,
ordered
> the acquittal of a drug suspect on appeal - when he was on duty in
Kalimantan
> province.
>
>
> Last night, a spokeswoman for Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock said
Australian
> authorities had received no formal request from the Indonesian Government
in
> relation to the new court hearings.
>
>
> However the spokeswoman said the Government would do everything it
possibly
> could within the bounds of agreements already in place.
>
>
> "At this stage we are not quite sure what is being requested but any
request
> would need to come from the Indonesian Government," the spokesman said.
>
>
> She said if Australian prisoners were formally asked to give evidence the
> Government could help as they did with Corby witness, Victorian prisoner
John
> Ford.
>
# In other words, Corby's team must try and prove her innocence - which is
fair enough, in a way. It would be desirable to find who did plant the
drugs, but is it essential?
What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
Corby's case differs markedly from the "Bali 9", insofar as the drugs were
found, in obvious fashion, in her cargo luggage, which anyone could tamper
with, and not strapped to her body.
She has consistently and emphatically pleaded her innocence. She is
either lying, or telling the truth. Either way, there's doubt as to
criminal intent, as distinct from (accidental?) possession.
Also, marijuana is mild compared to heroin or cocaine (although Indonesia
puts them all on a par).
If the conviction stands, then the sentence could at least be reduced (5
years, for carelessness?), with option of serving time in Australia.

[LDL]

> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?

Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in a
court system?

Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
Indonesians will like at all.

[DBDriver]

"LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message
news:1Ciye.14498$oJ.6700@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
>
> Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in a
> court system?
>
> Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
> Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
> Indonesians will like at all.

It's alright. The defence team are waiting for the person "who placed the
drugs in the baggage" to come forward and admit it. Failing that, I think
they (and her mother) seriously expect the Federal Police to go and "find"
someone, invent some damning evidence against them, and then put them on a
plane to Bali. Look out all you Brisbane and Sydney baggage handlers. Don't
stand too far from the pack or you'll be mugged and on a plane to Bali
before you know it.

The girl has got no hope with this defence team.

RJ.

[LDL]

"DBDriver" <DBDriver@iig2.com.au> wrote in message
news:6Liye.14505$oJ.5839@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message
> news:1Ciye.14498$oJ.6700@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
>>
>> Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in
>> a court system?
>>
>> Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
>> Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
>> Indonesians will like at all.
>
> It's alright. The defence team are waiting for the person "who placed the
> drugs in the baggage" to come forward and admit it. Failing that, I think
> they (and her mother) seriously expect the Federal Police to go and "find"
> someone, invent some damning evidence against them, and then put them on a
> plane to Bali. Look out all you Brisbane and Sydney baggage handlers.
> Don't stand too far from the pack or you'll be mugged and on a plane to
> Bali before you know it.
>
> The girl has got no hope with this defence team.
>
> RJ.

It has the basis of a good soapie.

[DBDriver]

"LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message
news:S9jye.14523$oJ.14199@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> It has the basis of a good soapie.

They sacked the guy who suggested that they treat the Indonesian Government
and Courts with respect! It sounded like he had started approaching this
dilemma with a more reasoned methodology.

RJ.

[amber.2]

> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?

Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in a
court system?

Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
Indonesians will like at all.
I doubt if any westerner will ever get a fair trial in Indonesia just recently a European woman who was caught with 15 kg of cannabis only got 7 years
and an Indonesian man who murdered his wife only got 10 years.and if you just happen to be the spiritual leader of a terrorist group who killed 202 westerners you just get 2 i/2 years and were still waiting for the firing squads to carry out the death sentences of the bombers

[Eric Johnson]

On 05/07/05 0~19, in article 1Ciye.14498$oJ.6700@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
"LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote:

>> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
>
> Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in a
> court system?


Yes, otherwise we have only the guilty and the not yet accused as the only
two groups in society.

ej

[LDL]

"Eric Johnson" <erj66@xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:BEF009A8.54DF%erj66@xs4all.nl...
> On 05/07/05 0~19, in article
> 1Ciye.14498$oJ.6700@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
> "LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote:
>
>>> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
>>
>> Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in
>> a
>> court system?
>
>
> Yes, otherwise we have only the guilty and the not yet accused as the only
> two groups in society.
>
> ej


Then put me in the class of the not yet accused.

[adchin]

> Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
> Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
> Indonesians will like at all.
>

Indonesian laws are a mockery in the first place, so this will not come as a
surprise.

[Observer]

"adchin" <adchin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42ca486c$1_2@news.tm.net.my...
> > Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
> > Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
> > Indonesians will like at all.
> >
>
> Indonesian laws are a mockery in the first place,

Why do say this?
Because you're an ill educated arsehole?
Tell us more about your legal training and
expertise so that we may evaluate whether
you are indeed qualified to say the things
you said, or just a plain arsehole?


> so this will not come as a
> surprise.

Would we be surprised if you turned up
to be an arsehole?

[Desi Arnez Snr]

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 21:23:15 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com>
wrote:

> She has consistently and emphatically pleaded her innocence. She is
>either lying, or telling the truth.

She may also be a schizophrenic who put the drug in her baggage under
some delusional state but now has no memory of it so she is not lying
when she claims she is innocent even though she is not telling the
truth.

She may also be suffering from false memory syndrome and think she did
actually put the grass in her baggage even though she didn't and so
she believes she is lying when she says she didn't do it even though
in actuality she is telling the truth.

[LDL]

"adchin" <adchin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:42ca486c$1_2@news.tm.net.my...
>> Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
>> Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
>> Indonesians will like at all.
>>
>
> Indonesian laws are a mockery in the first place, so this will not come as
> a
> surprise.


How so? Or is it that you don't agree with their values and therefore you
place them into the "stupid" category? If that is the case, then you are
not that bright either.

[LDL]

"Desi Arnez Snr" <nodesipam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:dtpkc1p2shnkervbaggvba9pth0l1119mq@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 21:23:15 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com>
> wrote:
>
>> She has consistently and emphatically pleaded her innocence. She is
>>either lying, or telling the truth.
>
> She may also be a schizophrenic who put the drug in her baggage under
> some delusional state but now has no memory of it so she is not lying
> when she claims she is innocent even though she is not telling the
> truth.
>
> She may also be suffering from false memory syndrome and think she did
> actually put the grass in her baggage even though she didn't and so
> she believes she is lying when she says she didn't do it even though
> in actuality she is telling the truth.

There are plenty of prisoners in prison that say that they are innocent.

[adchin]

LDL wrote:
> How so? Or is it that you don't agree with their values and therefore you
> place them into the "stupid" category? If that is the case, then you are
> not that bright either.

If they all did their work and were more careful in the whole situation,
none of this case reopening situation would arise, now, wouldn't it be
so ? Then when they put her away for 20 years, which I think is a bit
excessive, they will have a very concrete basis for doing so.

Re-opening a case, less than 3 months after a verdict has been placed ?
Doesn't that make a mockery of the whole judicial system ? And not to
forget, the financial costs involved, in doing things twice, instead of
doing it correctly and properly the first time around. The citizens are
paying for all this.

I may not be too bright, that's for sure, but the whole judicial system
in Indonesia ?

[adchin]

LDL wrote:

> Then put me in the class of the not yet accused.
>
>

Now wouldn't this make a mockery of the Indonesian judicial system ?
What happened to the third option, of people who are innocent ? Say if
Indonesia has a population of 200 million, and you have 20 million
guilty, the rest of the population is "not yet accused" then ?

[Don H]

"LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message
news:T_uye.15452$oJ.9830@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> "Desi Arnez Snr" <nodesipam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:dtpkc1p2shnkervbaggvba9pth0l1119mq@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 21:23:15 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> She has consistently and emphatically pleaded her innocence. She is
> >>either lying, or telling the truth.
> >
> > She may also be a schizophrenic who put the drug in her baggage under
> > some delusional state but now has no memory of it so she is not lying
> > when she claims she is innocent even though she is not telling the
> > truth.
> >
> > She may also be suffering from false memory syndrome and think she did
> > actually put the grass in her baggage even though she didn't and so
> > she believes she is lying when she says she didn't do it even though
> > in actuality she is telling the truth.
>
> There are plenty of prisoners in prison that say that they are innocent.
>
# True, but any person who is consciously and deliberately smuggling drugs
would tend to take a calculated risk, and show some bravado if caught;
they'd also try to conceal the drugs (not have them so obvious); and tend to
confess and collaborate in hope of reducing their sentence - Corby has done
none of this. Ergo, I'd claim she is telling the truth. Either that, or
she's a consummate actress ("drama queen") and her blatant display of a
large, transparent, non-hidden, bag of marijuana, is evidence of a deep
cunning and duplicity - which is alien to her seeming character.
Who are her collaborators? Who did she get the drugs from in Australia,
and to whom was she supposed to deliver them in Indonesia - if she was a
mule? Or, if a loner, and has done several trips to Bali in the past on
holiday - suddenly decides to become a drug smuggler? Why? Desperate for
money?
It's claimed Indonesia can't set Corby free without their justice system
appearing ridiculous. But what if such justice system isn't currently
equipped to judge an innocent person? That is, it has a presumption of
guilt where drug smugglers are concerned (and probably rightly so in most
cases). But this time they got it wrong? Setting her free might have its
problems - but jailing an innocent person for 20 years? What repercussions
will that have?

[Dave Baker]

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:27:55 +0800, adchin <adchin@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Re-opening a case, less than 3 months after a verdict has been placed ?
> Doesn't that make a mockery of the whole judicial system ?

It certainly makes a mockery of the defence. Why didn't they do it properly
the first time? Seems to me the Indonesian authorities are being overly
lenient.

Dave

The email address used for sending these postings is not valid.
All replies to the group please.

[Dave Baker]

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:47:10 GMT, "Don H" <donlhumphries@bigpond.com> wrote:

># True, but any person who is consciously and deliberately smuggling drugs
>would tend to take a calculated risk, and show some bravado if caught;
>they'd also try to conceal the drugs (not have them so obvious);

If they were concealed in a place that wasn't accessible to others, then,
when caught she'd have no excuse like "someone else put them there". Putting
them in an unlocked bag allows her to use this defence (though she didn't do
it very well).

>and tend to
>confess and collaborate in hope of reducing their sentence - Corby has done
>none of this.

Neither do most people, otherwise there would be no need for courts - just a
clerk to record the guilty pleas & a book to look up the sentence.

>Ergo, I'd claim she is telling the truth. Either that, or
>she's a consummate actress

Not a very good one - her act failed.

Dave

>But this time they got it wrong? Setting her free might have its
>problems - but jailing an innocent person for 20 years? What repercussions
>will that have?

Probably none - like what happened to the Japanese woman arrested & jailed
for years in Australia with a more plausible story than Corby.

Dave

The email address used for sending these postings is not valid.
All replies to the group please.

[L Sternn]

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 22:29:22 GMT, "DBDriver" <DBDriver@iig2.com.au>
wrote:

>
>"LDL" <enquires@asio.nsw.gov.au> wrote in message
>news:1Ciye.14498$oJ.6700@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>> What happens if it fails? Can she be given "benefit of the doubt"?
>>
>> Reasonable doubt. Isn't that a typical strategy for criminals to use in a
>> court system?
>>
>> Don't forget that if Schapelle goes free, it would make a mockery of the
>> Indonesian anti-drug trafficking laws in which I don't think that the
>> Indonesians will like at all.
>
>It's alright. The defence team are waiting for the person "who placed the
>drugs in the baggage" to come forward and admit it. Failing that, I think
>they (and her mother) seriously expect the Federal Police to go and "find"
>someone, invent some damning evidence against them, and then put them on a
>plane to Bali. Look out all you Brisbane and Sydney baggage handlers. Don't
>stand too far from the pack or you'll be mugged and on a plane to Bali
>before you know it.
>

How about they get the US to send them one of the lower level
terrorists from Guantanamo Bay?

After he testifies, he can spend the rest of his life in a Bali
prison.

Bali gets to save face, Australia gets their surfer babe back, America
gets rid of another terrorist AND has 1 less prisoner to deal with at
Gitmo.

It's a win-win-win-win situation!

>The girl has got no hope with this defence team.
>
>RJ.
>