Why is Corby guilty? (1 Viewer)

[Wesnat]

Btw, some people who think that we should just reinforce our law on them assume that not one person in the country was going to make any changes at all, so therefore we, the 'more civilised' ones, should directly interfere. From memory, Saudi Arabia recently allowed women to vote (if not Saudi Arabia, then some other country in the Middle East). Laws and values do change with time. There is no need to be naive.

 

[v sia]

i think we are drifting off topic

 

[Emily.]

isnt this thread supposed to be ppls opinions on schapelle corbys guilt?

 

[llamalope]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Corby...ent-against-her/2005/05/28/1117129935243.html

read this! Her appeal case isn't looking so good....

and if it asks you for a password, there's a list at www.bugmenot.com (I think)

 

[Korn]

3. Corby disputed Mr Winata's version, but there was no CCTV system in operation to support her denial.

5. Corby failed to notice the bag's extra weight. Her excuse was that the bag's handle had been broken on the way to Bali, meaning she had to drag it.

6. While Australian baggage handlers have since been linked to an airport cocaine-smuggling ring, which was in operation on the date Corby flew to Bali, there has never been any suggestion or evidence of them trafficking marijuana.

7. A drug dealer employing baggage handlers would be highly unlikely to smuggle four kilograms of marijuana into Brisbane airport and then into a stranger's bag, just to send it on to Sydney. Such a task would further require another handler at Sydney to sneak it out of the bag and hide it while attempting to get it out of the airport. As road haulage experts have confirmed, smug-glers could avoid this by sending it by road.

10. Had Corby been aware of the drugs and had her bag been properly secured with a padlock, there would have been no chance of her claiming that the marijuana had been planted in her bag.

This isnt very strong evidence against her or for her, so it should be dismissed.

3) There is no video evidence to support the customs officers, either
5) This is possible true & seeing that the handle broken on its way, could indicate that there was additional weight put in the bag, it also doesnt prove her guilt
6) This doesnt mean that they didnt transport other drugs or illegal goods
7) This sounds like bullshit, as interstate vehicles are regularly checked at borders (if im not mistaken, & there are no checks on domestic baggage between the baggage handlers)
10) This doesnt prove anything

 

[lawforever]

Nobody knows the truth. so why on earth are ppl spending time predicting if she is guilty or innocent after the verdict ? even if 100% australian are accepting her innocence, she will still be in the jail.

remember "seeing is believing".

My personal opinion is that corby is guilty cuz at least there was the concrete fact that drugs were found in her baggage.

 

[Bunny04]

The thing to remember is that the Drugs where found in HER bag, no matter if she says they aren't - I don't know if shes guilty or not, i have no side to this, for all we know she could be innocent, but to say that Schappelle didn't have a fair trial is kinda wrong, there are thousands of people a year that walk through Indonesian gates with drugs in luggage, on them etc.. .and they get sentenced.. its the way of the Criminal justice system- Corby was sentenced like anyone else- there are australians in jail in Indonesia, and no one in the past has set this much controversy over it. If drugs are found in her bag, well there isn't really anything to prove that they arent hers.

and i think its rather appaling that Australians are taking this too far. Boycotting indonesia, saying 'Im never going there, im not going to buy anything from Indonesia ever again- Etc... " its ridiculous- people sending harmful substances to the Indonesian embassy in Canberra- thats taking it way too far.

 

[Rafy]

a new Morgan poll found only 51 per cent of Australians believe Corby is not guilty. An increasing number - 21 per cent - believe she is guilty while 28 per cent remain undecided. Thirty seven per cent said Prime Minister John Howard should wait until after Corby's appeal to ask the Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to pardon her, 21 per cent said he should request the pardon now, and 5 per cent couldn't say.

"The media would have everyone believe that an overwhelming majority of Australians think Schapelle Corby is innocent, but this poll shows it is only a slight majority of 51 per cent," pollster Gary Morgan said.



Indeed quite interesting. Wasnt there a poll some weeks ago showing 90% support for corby?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yes it was an ACA poll, but then again... I guess 90% of ACA viewers probably do think she's innocent.

 

[iambored]

Indeed quite interesting. Wasnt there a poll some weeks ago showing 90% support for corby?

yes that aca poll. the people voting were getting fired up by the footage showing she was probably innocent

 

[HotShot]

too many times

i have said this too many time in other threads, anyway she is guilty. noone hangs around with 4kg of drugs and doesnt know its in there bag. its natural for huamns to take drugs nad like dogs we can smell it, thats how the in donesians found out and she knew they were drugs in her bag.

anyhow, are you saying she never opened the bag ever to check the contents. obviously she is guilty, but i feel thats not the main concern its the 20-year sentenc, which is ridiculous. for 4kg of drugs i would 10k dollars and maybe a month in jail maximum.

 

[lawforever]

anyhow, are you saying she never opened the bag ever to check the contents. obviously she is guilty, but i feel thats not the main concern its the 20-year sentenc, which is ridiculous. for 4kg of drugs i would 10k dollars and maybe a month in jail maximum.

4 kg drug is serious enough for death sentence in lota asian countries. it z not indonesians law are too harsh, it is just cuz we have a soft legal penalty system on drug abuses and lots of ppl now taking granted as "1 month jail +10K fine" for smuggling drugs.

saying 20 years are too harsh is just a tragedy of self-appreciation.

 

[blackfriday]

in australia some indonesian dude got nabbed with a kilo and got five years, and corby had four times as much so she gets four times the sentence. in singapore, you get hanged not many questions asked, and if corby wasnt an aussie i bet they would have shot her ass real quick.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

i have said this too many time in other threads, anyway she is guilty. noone hangs around with 4kg of drugs and doesnt know its in there bag. its natural for huamns to take drugs nad like dogs we can smell it, thats how the in donesians found out and she knew they were drugs in her bag.

anyhow, are you saying she never opened the bag ever to check the contents. obviously she is guilty, but i feel thats not the main concern its the 20-year sentenc, which is ridiculous. for 4kg of drugs i would 10k dollars and maybe a month in jail maximum.

I think around 8-10 years might be appropriate for drug trafficking of that quantity

whatever the laws happen to be, 20 years is pretty harsh

 

[HotShot]

k fine

20 years is reasonable ofr azn law, but not in ozzie law. anyhow, her fault!

 

[Genesys]

Points not whether or not she was quilty...It's whether or not they have enough proof to establish her guilt beyond reasonable doubt...which I don't think they do. My reasons are as follows
1) Some evidence which could have made a difference was discounted
2) baggage handlers make mistakes
3) eye witness testimony is based on two baggage handlers who couldn't speak english thus there was vast room for misinterpretation of what corby was saying
4) Only prima faci is the actual drugs- no fingerprint evidence or anything along those lines

 

[v sia]

Points not whether or not she was quilty...It's whether or not they have enough proof to establish her guilt beyond reasonable doubt...which I don't think they do. My reasons are as follows
1) Some evidence which could have made a difference was discounted
2) baggage handlers make mistakes
3) eye witness testimony is based on two baggage handlers who couldn't speak english thus there was vast room for misinterpretation of what corby was saying
4) Only prima faci is the actual drugs- no fingerprint evidence or anything along those lines

sigh how biast , you left out so much

 

[Genesys]

sigh how biast , you left out so much

I probably am "biased". I am not claiming to have a vast knowlege of the case. I just gave a few of the reasons which came to mind. I simply feel her trial was not sufficient to prove her guilt.

 

[v sia]

well you left out the fact that she had 4.1 kg of marijuana in her bag that fit like a glove , also the bag was a space bag .. the ones that you get from Danoz direct .

 

[Genesys]

So if you were caught carrying a gun that was used to kill someone you are automatically involved with the murder??? It doesn't rule out the possibility that it could have been planted