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.
perhaps you didnt read my ramble on prima facie cases?
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.
The Indonesian legal system is innocent before proven guilty. However this case, as a prima facie case has been established, it is like being guilty before proven innocent beacuse the evidence alone is enough (she was caught red handed with the drugs) The defense has to show that the drugs are not hers. This would be the case in ANY legal system, even in Australia. The concept of reasonable doubt in how you decribe it is irrelevant in prima facie cases.
Hope that cleared some things up
Do you think Shapelle Corby is guilty or innocent?
/ –
