Australians Threaten Boycott Against Indonesia

[tinybear]

Australian Schapelle Corby was convicted by an Indonesian court consisting of 3 judges of trafficking in marijuana: a capital offence. She was sentenced to 20 year's imprisonment. This caused an uproar in Ozland. Australians believe she did not receive a fair trial. They are outraged and many have vowed to boycott Indonesia. Australians account for a very high percentage of the tourism industry in Bali, Indonesia.

Read more: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...5E1702,00.html

What do you think folks? If you were Australian, would you be boycotting Indonesia? If so, why? If not, why not? Do you sympathise with Corby?

[tman_ndsu08]

It's pretty stupid that being a drug dealer is a capital offense.

[tinybear]

Be that as it may, that's Indonesia's law and if you enter a foreign country, you have an obligation to abide by its laws. Now, what do you think of that decision?

[G. Adams]

If you take risks and fail, accept the consequences. I don't see what the fuss is, she fucked up, now she takes her bumps.

[tinybear]

Do you think there's anything wrong with how she was found guilty though?

[G. Adams]

She probably is innocent (the idea of smuggling 4+kg of marajuana on a plane just seem ridiculous), but the evidence points strongly the other way. There is nothing but conjecture in her defence. I don't see how an objective system could come to any other conclusion. I'm just glad she wasn't executed.

[tman_ndsu08]

Certainly our own legal system as well as Austrainia's would've found her guilty.

The outrage is over the magnitude of the punishment, which in now way fits the crime.

[tinybear]

If the evidence points the other way, why do you say she's innocent? It was stupid? Of course it was. But people are stupid sometimes, aren't they? Or they are blinded by greed. But is there anything wrong with the court's decision? I think there is. And I think sghe might well have an appeal.

[G. Adams]

I'm saying I believe she's innocent because I don't think anyone who afford to by that my cannabis would be so inexperienced as to try and walk through airport customs. However, that is conjecture, as was her defence that someone planted it. She was found with a substantial amount of class a drugs, and has no evidence to demonstrate it is not hers. The case is open and shut until evidence for the defence is presented.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: tinybear Or they are blinded by greed. But is there anything wrong with the court's decision? I think there is. And I think sghe might well have an appeal.

What about it is wrong? If she was a male Indonesion she would up against the wall, not serving a sentance. I would object to having such sentances in my country, but it isn't. You take risks when you go to countries like Indonesia. If I take a safari in Zimbabwe and get kidnapped it is an appalling situation, but I did know the risk involved.

[tinybear]

OK, consider this: The burden is on the prosecution to prove the drugs were hers. They seek to do this by showing that the drugs were found amongst her luggage. It was then up to her to present a defense which 'casts a reasonable doubt' on whether the drugs were hers despite being found amongst her luggage. If she fails to do so, she's convicted.

However, what the court said was this: ""No one has proved that someone else owned that marijuana or has identified who was the one involved in putting that marijuana in the defendant's bag."

Whilst, as I've said, whilst it was incumbent upon the accused to cast a reasonable doubt upon the prosecution's case, it does not require her to identify the real culprit who planted the drugs in her luggage. All she had to do was to create a reasonable possibility that the drugs might have been planted by someone. That's why I think she might well have an appeal. We'll see how it goes. I think she's going to appeal for sure.

Incidentally, don't you think it was stupid of Judge Sirait to boast 'to have never acquitted a drug case in his career of 500-plus trials'? Not exactly the brightest cookie in the jar, ain't he?

[Cephus]

It doesn't bother me at all. She broke the law, she was found guilty and she was given a relatively light sentence, considering what they could have done. Maybe Australia can boycott and Indonesia can just execute her.

[G. Adams]

Quote by: tinybear OK, consider this: The burden is on the prosecution to prove the drugs were hers. They seek to do this by showing that the drugs were found amongst her luggage. It was then up to her to present a defense which 'casts a reasonable doubt' on whether the drugs were hers despite being found amongst her luggage. If she fails to do so, she's convicted. However, what the court said was this: ""No one has proved that someone else owned that marijuana or has identified who was the one involved in putting that marijuana in the defendant's bag." Whilst, as I've said, whilst it was incumbent upon the accused to cast a reasonable doubt upon the prosecution's case, it does not require her to identify the real culprit who planted the drugs in her luggage. All she had to do was to create a reasonable possibility that the drugs might have been planted by someone. That's why I think she might well have an appeal. We'll see how it goes. I think she's going to appeal for sure. Incidentally, don't you think it was stupid of Judge Sirait to boast 'to have never acquitted a drug case in his career of 500-plus trials'? Not exactly the brightest cookie in the jar, ain't he?

I certainly hope she gets her appeal and can provide new evidence that does cast reasonable doubt upon the prosecutions case. However, from what I've seen, I don't think she has any so far.

Agreed, such a boast has nothing to do with supporting justice, rather to scare the population.

[tinybear]

It does more than that. It shows the man's a biased judge and not fit to be one.

[tman_ndsu08]

Quote by: Cephus It doesn't bother me at all. She broke the law, she was found guilty and she was given a relatively light sentence, considering what they could have done. Maybe Australia can boycott and Indonesia can just execute her.

If they had any brains at all, they would've simply fined her and sent her home. Now they're going to end up spending far more money to keep her in prison for 20 years.

[tinybear]

Fine her? She's lucky she's not facing a firing squad.

[mr.perfecto]

Quote by: tinybear OK, consider this: The burden is on the prosecution to prove the drugs were hers. They seek to do this by showing that the drugs were found amongst her luggage. It was then up to her to present a defense which 'casts a reasonable doubt' on whether the drugs were hers despite being found amongst her luggage. If she fails to do so, she's convicted. However, what the court said was this: ""No one has proved that someone else owned that marijuana or has identified who was the one involved in putting that marijuana in the defendant's bag." Whilst, as I've said, whilst it was incumbent upon the accused to cast a reasonable doubt upon the prosecution's case, it does not require her to identify the real culprit who planted the drugs in her luggage. All she had to do was to create a reasonable possibility that the drugs might have been planted by someone. That's why I think she might well have an appeal. We'll see how it goes. I think she's going to appeal for sure. Incidentally, don't you think it was stupid of Judge Sirait to boast 'to have never acquitted a drug case in his career of 500-plus trials'? Not exactly the brightest cookie in the jar, ain't he?

Matlock always found the real criminal.

Not all countries share the same legal principles and theories. It sounds like it could be a setup, then again she could be a very accomplished liar. Did she get a fair trial? As long as it operated according to Indonesian law, yes.

If her appeal doesn't work out and if I were the Australian PM (assuming I weren't looking for a reason to invade Indonesia--you can't be too sure about the goals of government leaders these days), I'd look to find something I could convict her of and extradite her home to stand trial.

[mr.perfecto]

Quote by: tman_ndsu08 If they had any brains at all, they would've simply fined her and sent her home. Now they're going to end up spending far more money to keep her in prison for 20 years.

You can't fight a war (on drugs) without a little Shock 'n Awe.

[RVonse]

What a horror story. Their drug war is even stupider than ours (US).

If a customs agent planted something in your suitcase how would you be able to prove otherwise? And even if she was guilty, the punishment does not fit the crime in any way.

A story like this makes me wonder if I ever want to travel abroad. Just too risky.

[tinybear]

Just don't travel to Indonesia.