Well, what are your thoughts?

Did she intentionally smuggle drugs into bali? or were they put into her bag by someone else

Please, respect other peoples opinions, and don't flame anyone else for having a different opinion than your own

I doubt anybody could've gotten close enough to put the drugs in her bag, if they wanted to smuggle drugs, they would've got a trusted and more professional source, rather than risk losing the drugs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
I doubt anybody could've gotten close enough to put the drugs in her bag, if they wanted to smuggle drugs, they would've got a trusted and more professional source, rather than risk losing the drugs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
I doubt anybody could've gotten close enough to put the drugs in her bag

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
if they wanted to smuggle drugs, they would've got a trusted and more professional source, rather than risk losing the drugs.

---

On balance of probabilities i would say she was innocent.

She definately wouldnt have being convicted if she was on trial under Australian law....


Btw people outside Oz actually know about corby?!

lol okay gimme a cliffnotes version of who she is

quote:

---

Originally posted by -rafy-
She definately wouldnt have being convicted if she was on trial under Australian law....

---

quote:

---

A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense, and not the mere possibility of innocence. A reasonable doubt is the kind of doubt that would make a reasonable person hesitate to act. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, must be proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable person would not hesitate to rely and act upon it. However, proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.

---

The media hypes stuff up to much these days get over it.

She is definately innocent. I can't see any reasons why she would be guilty.

Unlike the Bali 9, they're fucked. They were stupid enough to strap the stuff to their bodies. Idiots (I feel ashamed that one of them use to go to my school!). But I feel sorry for them in a wierd way.

Anyway, back to Corby... She's innocent!!! I can't understand why the judge would send her to jail for 20 years while the guy who planned the Bali bombings, got 2 years!!!!!

Would somebody please point me in the direction of an article in relation to this case, I would like to read through it and check out stuff.

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
Would somebody please point me in the direction of an article in relation to this case, I would like to read through it and check out stuff.

---

no to sound stupid or anything but who is Chapelle Corby?

is he from the Chapelle show?

It's a she, and her name is actually Schapelle Corby.

Don't get her mixed up with David LaChapelle aka Dave Chapelle like I did when I first read the thread .

lol. I didn't know it would go International. I heard that the US got a little snippet of the story one night. But that is about it.

In Australia it's BIG news. Always on every night.

quote:

---

Originally posted by linx05
She is definately innocent

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by linx05
I can't see any reasons why she would be guilty.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by linx05
Unlike the Bali 9, they're fucked

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
But I feel sorry for them in a wierd way.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by linx05
I can't understand why the judge would send her to jail for 20 years while the guy who planned the Bali bombings, got 2 years!!!!!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SikStyles
no to sound stupid or anything but who is Chapelle Corby?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
It's a she, and her name is actually Schapelle Corby.

---

i think shes GUILTY!!!...i dont think someone could have done that

I totally think she's innocent. It just so happened to be that at the same airport she went to in Australia there was a drug smuggling ring were the baggage handlers put the drugs in peoples bags and told the fellas on the other end to take them out. It just so happened to be that they put the drugs on the wrong plane and well we all know whats happened to them. Well thats what I reckkon happened anyway.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Calvin
she's definetly innocent, you can just tell about her that she didnt know the drugs were there.Who would be that stupid, she was just going on a holiday and now shes going to spend 20 years from her family, if you ask me the least they can do is let her serve her sentnce here in australia

---

I wont go as far as saying she is innocent, there are a few things that draw some questions on here innocence....Without looking at all the evidence, NONE of you should b able to say she is definately guilty/not-guilty, so dont try to.....

The question of quilt then basically comes down to the legal system and teh burden of proof. Now in Australia, there would be reasonable boubt to here guilt as to be let off....

However, under Indonesian law, there is teh assumption she is guilty, beacuse lets face it her bag DID contain 4.1kg of drugs. In indonesia, she was caught red handed and therefore its on her to prove her innocence....

I am uncomfortable about the hype surrounding this. WHat about the othe 151 australians in overseas jails? There should be NO government support of her case ouside of that she is entitled too under Legal aid legeslation (which is what the current funding aggaments by the commonwelath of her case are a result of) If we support her, shouldnt we be supporting the other people as well?

Having said that the Bali nine for example are just stuffed. They are as good as dead...

Now respect the Indonesian Legal system and their right to do what they want. Its a little thing called soverinty

Shes innocent. the aussie airport bag handlers are mostly convicted ex-crims. What about Abu Baka Bashir he only got 2 an a 1/2 years for the bali bombings

All circumstantial evidence. In the end, legally the baggage handler claims mean nothing in a court. Unless they DIRECTLY link a baggage handler to tampering with specifically corbys bag...it does really mean nothing......

You can not conclusivly say she is innocent, just as you cant say she is guilty.


btw Bashir wasnt convicted over the bali bombings.....it was a lesser crime

now due to the situation of one of our fellow aussie facing life imprisonment in a 'not so cushy' third world detention we have somehow overlooked a few obvious factors.

australia has relaxed our laws for mariuanna over the last 10 years. if you got caught with a bag of dope like that on home soil there would be heafty fines, good behaviour bonds and a slim chance of imprisonment pending on your past criminal history.

1. with a name like shappelle, i think she has been a passive smoker since she was a wee lass.

2.your sister runs an exclusive 'warung/surf camp' in one of the worlds finest paradises where the european clientelle are quite willing to top dollar for some decent weed to take on the surf boat charters out to the reefs. further more eradicating the risks of being set up by the many undercover cops offering drugs along the popular beach fronts.

3.most australians have spent some amount of time in asia and the loose ones who have experienced the local dope can quickly tell you they have no knowledge about manicuring and storage proccess....etc
mixed with the harsh cheap asian tobaccos. we all know what a throat retching experience this can be making your holiday spliffs far and few between.

4. her father looks like a well oiled bikey and the family resides in queensland where most of australias decent weed is grown in the much abundant sunshine.

so ive come to the minority conclusion that shappelle corby is not innocent but just a silly girl who never quite thought through the consiquences of her regular drug run to bali. i feel really sorry for her but it wouldnt have even made the news if it had happened in australia.

if she gets imprisoned in indonisia its more likely she will pay her way out in a couple of years anyway.

and never again will she jeopardize her freedom. big lesson for us all.

i think she is innocent. the Judge that convicted her (the main one not
the two lesser ones) had a ratio of like 500:0 convictions. ass you can
see he has a reputation to hold. what do they care if an Australian
get's jailed. now i might be a little extreme here but i want to see
that Judge get assisnated. and if the people who really did it get
found i think it's time we brought back Public Stonings.

too much subjectivity within the Australian public, and not enough objective examination of ALL the facts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ~!dylan!~
i think shes GUILTY!!!...i dont think someone could have done that

---

I can't believe she is getting so much publicity. Why! The media is only telling the Australian public what they want to hear....The Corby's won't do interviews with media that won't be biased towards their campaign. Frequent trips to Bali to see a sister who runs a surf business with her Balinese partner. A stuffed boogie board bag that is so stuffed with dope it would be impossible not to notice that it wasn't how you packed it let alone an extra 4.1kg of weight to carry????? How much does a boogie board weigh???? Look, everyone is so quick to point to the baggage handlers as a scapegoat. We aren't getting facts, aussies are just gullible followers of the media and what is served up to them on a platter. The ABC recently had an excellent doco on just how biased this case is...unfortunately it was on at almost midnight. I really haven't seen any facts that she is innocent. All you hear is "the poor beautician"....I bet if she was male or unattractive we wouldn't have heard a thing. Oh...the Bali Bomber....two of his accomplices are on death row. The nine other blokes...what can I say....the higher the risk, the higher the return. No sympathy here. Back to Schapelle....doesn't everyone know how important it is to have your bags locked just for this reason, let alone theft?? Also sick of these people wanting their tsunami donations back that went to Indonesia because of this. What has that got to do with anything???? Academics here have said the trial was  fair. Australians seem to think the idea that their legal system is so superior to the Indonesians. Laughable whe Australia is holding a supposed Japanese heroin importer since 1992 which Japan said would never have been convicted if she was in Japan. I just wish the Australian media would have some balls and show informed, factual, unbiased coverage.

To me the Chapelle Corby case looks like a tragic travesty of law and justice.Where I come from at least amongst those of my circle who have a bit of travel experience the name Bali is synonymus with bribery and corruption , and certainly if we are talking about their "police" or judiciary.
I am not an Australian however I have nothing but positive and enjoyable memories of numerous long and short visits to Australia a country with a heart and people with a friendly and forthright manner.
But it is upsetting to see on the news some Australian politicians speaking about the Corby case and Indonesia as if Indonesia has a legitimate judicial system and police force and Chapelle Corby has had a fair trial.
The fact of the marijuana being in Corby's bag is the only evidence that I can find anywhere against her.
Also my knowledge of drug trafficking , like most average people I suppose , is almost nil , however don't smugglers do it for money?And couldn't that quantity of marijuana be obtained in Bali for a fraction of what it would cost to obtain in Australia ?Drug smuggling is meant to travel to "markets" where high prices will be paid for the drug isnt it?
As for why the marijuana was in Corby's luggage,whose fingerprints might be on the clear plastic bag,what motive if any she might have for having the marijuana.........none of this seems to even be considered of consequence in Bali. After all 50,000 to 100,000 rupiah is reputed to be enough to have most small crimes (real or trumped up) magically forgotten.While their "Judiciary" gives the person who kills innocent people with a bomb some ludicrously short jail sentence.
I think that in any country which had a true judicial system with real rules of evidence Corby may have been charged but by now the case would have to be dropped due to flagrant disregard for her rights as a human being.In short this woman has been treated barbarically by a society whose children are often sold into forced sex slavery to mention just one revolting behaviour that their corrupt officials have neither the will nor to intention to stop.The powers that be in Chapelle Corby's homeland should be leaping to her aid , to protect her rights and safety.Even if she were demonstrably guilty of a crime , and she certainly is not.

Had Schapelle not been an attractive young lady, I'm sure she would have received far less media coverage. Personally, I think she's innocent, solely on the fact that the whole situation seems incredibly wack - I can't believe anyone would be foolish enough to attempt smuggling 4.1 kilos of drugs without at least attempting to conceal them, especially in a place where they risk the death penalty. However, I guess the bali nine is proof that some people do make stupid mistakes.

I read several articles that mentioned much evidence that could have made a big difference in proving her innocence was botched - for example, the drugs were found in a bag which they wanted to fingerprint to see if it had in fact been handled by other people, as it was inside the larger boogie board bag. However, the police refused to fingerprint it, I think because it had been contaminated - it had been handled by several people already without gloves - including the JUDGE himself..
Basically, since you are considered guilty until proven innocent, I guess it was a losing battle for her, especially when they are unwilling to cooperate. How are you supposed to prove your innocence if they ruin all your evidence?

Anyway, I think it's funny how they said "please don't boycott us" - I don't think they understand that people don't like being sentanced to death for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Okay here is some of the evidence from the other side of the case (The evidence the media isnt talking about)


- The package in the boogie board bag, had the EXACT dimensions as the outer pockets of the bag, and was a precise fit in Shappell's bag. The volume of the area of the bag it was found was 4.1 kg.

- Corby's father has a prior conviction for growing Hydroponic Canabis

- Hyrdoponic Canabis (which was the type found in Corby's bag) is worth alot MORE in Bali than it is in AUstralia, especially when sold to foreign tourists who dont trust indonesian made drugs.

- This is circumstancial, but there has being a break-down in the relationship between corby and her brother (who also has being arrested on drug offenses before) suggesting that her brother may have being part of it.

There are a few more points of evidence. Just read the judgement.

oh and by the way, there is NO indication that Corby did not recieve a fair trial. The judges went out their way to ensure she did recieve one. All rules of evience, of procedure, etc were followed.

She is just lucky they didnt apply the death penalty.

I also think that she is most probably guilty, especially considering she has travelled to Bali 33 times (I realise that this can be a normal occurrance). The main thing for me is that if I picked up my bag, i would deffinately notice a 4.1kg difference in weight.
The only factor which I didnt think made sense was the fact that the drugs would be worth less in Bali, after reading what rafy said above, i cant see how she is innocent.
Being trialed for death by a judge who has prosecuted all of his criminals to the full extent of the law, she is lucky to get away with a twenty year penalty. Yes, this is far worse than 20 years in an Australian prison but she got caught with the drugs and there is nothing she can do about it.
Still this could all change with the appeals from the Corby lawyers and the prosecutors who thought that the charge was too lenient

quote:

---

Originally posted by -rafy-
Okay here is some of the evidence from the other side of the case (The evidence the media isnt talking about)


- The package in the boogie board bag, had the EXACT dimensions as the outer pockets of the bag, and was a precise fit in Shappell's bag. The volume of the area of the bag it was found was 4.1 kg.

- Corby's father has a prior conviction for growing Hydroponic Canabis

- Hyrdoponic Canabis (which was the type found in Corby's bag) is worth alot MORE in Bali than it is in AUstralia, especially when sold to foreign tourists who dont trust indonesian made drugs.

- This is circumstancial, but there has being a break-down in the relationship between corby and her brother (who also has being arrested on drug offenses before) suggesting that her brother may have being part of it.

There are a few more points of evidence. Just read the judgement.

oh and by the way, there is NO indication that Corby did not recieve a fair trial. The judges went out their way to ensure she did recieve one. All rules of evience, of procedure, etc were followed.

She is just lucky they didnt apply the death penalty.

---

Some of the points are from a Sydney Morning Herald Article i read some time ago (I cant find a link as it has being archived), others came from a summary of points from the age newspaper (below)....

Regarding point 1, if you know anything about the law, this fact immediately establishes a prima facie case. There is a case to answer, no matter what the country, and as a prima facie case, the defense has no choice but to prove that she is innocent.

1. The vacuum-sealed marijuana was in a boogie board bag that Corby admitted owning.

2. Customs official Gusti Nyoman Winata said he asked Corby to open the bag, but she unzipped only a front pocket. "When I opened it a bit, she said: 'No'," Mr Winata said. "I asked: 'Why?', and she said: 'I have some,' and looked confused." Mr Winata added that she blocked his hand to stop him opening the main zip.

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

4. A second customs official said Corby admitted owning the drugs.

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.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

8. Prosecutors claim the plastic bag was the same size and shape as the boogie board bag, suggesting it had been organised to fit, as opposed to being stuffed in by someone else, such as baggage handlers.

9. Hydroponic marijuana is highly sought after among cashed-up expatriates and tourists in Bali.

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.

I think that bloke who caused the Bali bombings should have got the firing squad, but I also think that Chapelle Corby should get it as well. Didn't you hear about the letters they found from her bloke in Indonesia complaining about the poor quality of weed there. And besides, 4 kilos of weed is alot and I reckon you'd notice it someone had smuggled it into your bag.

The bali bombing is a much more complicated case, and those who have being DIRECTLY involved have recieved either life terms, or death.

I dont think Shapelle should get the death penalty. 20 years is substantial enough, although i do think they will lmake that life on appeal.

Now i want to eleaborate on the legal concept of Prima Facie. The are so many people around saying she hasnt gotten a fair trial beacuse she is in some way guilty before being proven innocent in Indonesia. In any jurasdiction this would be the case.  Prima Facie is latin for 'At first view or on its face'. Meaning that evidence Requires no additional support to establish validity or credibility. It is resumed to be true unless disproved by evidence to the contrary. It refers to evidence that, at first appearance, seems to establish a particular fact, but that may be later contradicted by other evidence.

What that means is that substantial evidence exists (SHe was found with the drugs in HER bag) for that evidence to stand alone on court. As she was effectively caught red handed, the onus is on her to prove that the drugs in the bag were not hers.

I would like to thank rafy for his accurate and detailed description of the law. As an australian law student I can confirm what he is saying about a primie facie case. I think Australians need to let their minds rather than their hearts do the talking. Emotions need to be separated from what are the cold hard facts of the case as rafy has pointed out. For another enlightening article on the issue I suggest you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schapelle_Corby

And I would highlight a quote:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Professor Tim Lindsay
Professor Tim Lindsay has stated that the defence case contained "virtually nothing that was admissible evidence to be given weight under Indonesian criminal procedure law" [3]

---

quote:

---

Legal commentators in Australia have remarked that Ford's testimony, as hearsay, would be inadmissable evidence in an Australian court, but it was allowed under the Indonesian justice system, where the judges exercise a discretion over whether or not the evidence can be admitted

---

Creative ideas to spice up Corby news
June 10, 2005


The jury is out on Corby media coverage, writes Laura Jenkins.

I am the first to admit the Schapelle Corby case is fascinating. Even the most garish Hollywood scriptwriter would be hard-pressed inventing the Corby characters: the inexperienced lawyer, the stumbling interpreter, the once bankrupt financial backer, the sister with the enormous mouth named after a prestige German vehicle and the mother who, let's just say, never went to finishing school.

Love them or hate them, Schapelle and her coterie are must-see TV. But instead of bombarding us over and over with meaningless phone and internet polls, and even Channel Nine's ridiculous "worm" of approval, as to whether Schapelle is innocent, I wish the media would indulge our unhealthy interest with more exciting poll questions. For example:

 Vote for the funniest name involved in this case: a) Schapelle; b) Mercedes; c) Lily Lubis; d) Rosleigh Rose; e) Connie Panglahila.

 What is it about "our Schapelle" that makes you most proud? a) Her ability to maintain perfect eyebrows while in prison; b) That she still uses a boogie board at age 27; c) That she actually told her mother to shut her trap in court.

 Schapelle is said to spend her time in jail knitting. What on earth is she making in such a sweltering country? a) A muzzle for her mother for the appeals case; b) An imitation QC's wig for Lily Lubis - the closest she'll ever get to the real thing; c) A pair of fluffy dice for Ron Bakir.

 If you were being sentenced for drug crimes on TV, what would you want your mum to yell at the judge? a) Heaps of expletives like Rosleigh, mainly consisting of verbs used as adjectives; b) Something crazy to do with refunding a tsunami donation; c) A barb about the head judge having not found anyone innocent in 500 cases, so what was the point of the whole charade?

 Does your opinion of Schapelle change if she is guilty? a) Yes, I'm an Aussie and I only back teams when they are winning; b) Not at all, I'm a bit sick of Indonesia. Why can't we be neighbours with a benign country like Canada? c) She should just serve time in one of our comfy jails, which everyone knows are more like luxury hotels.

After thinking about the Corbys way too much, I have even started to wonder how my family would behave, if it were me. Being from the North Shore, my parents would mainly be disappointed that I had booked a holiday to Bali in the first place, and then they would hire flashy lawyers to get me off. If that failed they would storm the jail and we would sail to Majorca, Skase-style.

Or perhaps not. In reality, all they could do is watch the nightmare unfold, like Schapelle's family, but with less swearing and dressed in Country Road. I hope my mum would manage to leave her Helen Kaminski straw hat at home and that my dad wouldn't try and tell the judge I went to the same school as John Howard's daughter. Maybe the Corbys aren't so embarrassing after all.

i never really thought about the schapelle case much,
after been fed what all the media have been saying i had always just assumed that she was innocent, that the drugs had being planted there in her bag, that the indonesian justice system is unfair, that the drugs were worth virtually nothing in bali and there is no logical reason why she would smuggle the drugs into bali and it must have been the luggage handlers and that she was just a poor girl in the wrong place at the wrong time.
After hearin some points for the other side of the argument however i realise that if the media had showed the whole story i doubt she'd have such mass of people who are all 'absolutely certain' that shes guilty.
also im certainly no longer sure that she's innocent, not 100% sure that shes guilty either but its certainly an interesting debate and i believe that (from what ive heard which i doubt is not even close to the whole story) their is not really enough evidence to prove her inncocence especially with the 'guilty till proven innocent' system in indonesia, but there may be enough to quallify as reasonable doubt and therefore under australian law, be proven innocent.
still even if she is guilty, 20 years in those conditions just for marijiuana is far too harsh...

tbh i think what is hellarious there is a sign which is on her shop in qld which says back in 20

quote:

---

Originally posted by revilox
not really enough evidence to prove her inncocence especially with the 'guilty till proven innocent' system in indonesia, but there may be enough to quallify as reasonable doubt and therefore under australian law, be proven innocent.

---

quote:

---

The are so many people around saying she hasnt gotten a fair trial beacuse she is in some way guilty before being proven innocent in Indonesia. In any jurasdiction this would be the case.  Prima Facie is latin for 'At first view or on its face'. Meaning that evidence Requires no additional support to establish validity or credibility. It is resumed to be true unless disproved by evidence to the contrary. It refers to evidence that, at first appearance, seems to establish a particular fact, but that may be later contradicted by other evidence.

What that means is that substantial evidence exists (SHe was found with the drugs in HER bag) for that evidence to stand alone on court. As she was effectively caught red handed, the onus is on her to prove that the drugs in the bag were not hers.

---

that just proves my last point all wrong but still, i think its amazing how one sided the media coverage has been of the whole case so far and (from what ive seen in New Zealand) there has been virtually no media coverage showing the other side to the argument, and how easily (even i) was suckered by it and was so sure that she was innocent without even thinking that there might be another side to the story,
goes to show not to make a judgement until youve got all the facts...still not sure if shes guilty or not on this one though
-
chers rafy,

what kind of drugs?? and if it's weed then i would, so maybe she did!

I'm not sure but i would say she is not guilty. But i cant say that (obviosly) with certainity.
So i voted for Im unsure but if only yes and no were the options then my answer would be no.
Wanna know why ??

quote:

---

Originally posted by traxor
if they wanted to smuggle drugs, they would've got a trusted and more professional source, rather than risk losing the drugs.

---

But drug smuggling through airporty baggage handlers has been proven.  Many handlers were caught red handed.

shes innocent because someone couldve had a bag like heres and they got mixed up or sometin