Spendocrat "Are you saying it's not even possible that someone else put drugs there?"

On the balance of reasonable probability - the drugs are Corby's

" why have you decided without any doubt of Corby's guilt?"

I am anticipating the result of the trial - i am not paid to decide on her guilt, Judges in Indonesia, listening to "ALL" the evidence do that.

"What if drugs had been placed in your bag Col, and if you tried to tell someone they weren't yours, they just said: 'the lies of the criminal class never change.'? "

I will deal with that if and when it ever happens

"The truth is you never know with these things, "

The truth is - you don't know either - you are just guessing and colouring your views wih a twisted version of reality to support your personal prejudices.

" With as little evidence as they had, the case should have been chucked straight away. "

Not according to the judges who heared all the evidence.

- according to her trial judges and that is what really matters -

Corby is GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY

- may she rot in gaol for a long time.

Col Rouge, You seem rather harsh. I worked in Indonesia for 9 years and studied their justice system closely. Indonesians refer to their judicial officers as the "mafia pengadilan" or "courtroom mafia". Judges in Indonesia are widely considered to be extremely corrupt and deficient and the judicial system largely unreformed from the Soeharto era. Indonesians, in referring to the performance of their judiciary, say it is "nol besar" - a BIG ZERO! Decisions are made based on a variety of legal, financial and political reasons. I am not denigrating Indonesia or Indonesians as a whole. But they themselves would be the first to recognise the shortcomings of their system. I'm sure 9 out of the 10 people they catch with drugs are guilty, but that leaves one out of 10 who is not. I put it to you that a person who was as guilty as you claim Corby is would not act in the way she has. If she were really guilty, she would accept her fate eventually. Corby is either not guilty OR she deserves an Oscar! Finally, your lack of knowledge of the Corby case is clearly illustrated if you think that Phillip Opas, QC was retained as Corby's lawyer. He is one of Australia's most experienced barristers, now retired, who gave his opinion on the case gratuitously.

Playing words is a talent itself, however NONE can assumes own guilt, even Jake the Riper.

And what do AUSTRALIANS think of their juridical system IN-PRIVATE, not as usual double-meaningly-bumbling something to avoid being written in a b l a c k b o o k?

By a way, no mistakes have been shown by Spelling and Grammar

Col believes that because neither of us know for sure, she should 'rot in jail for a long time'. Can't argue with that logic!

Rogindon “He is one of Australia's most experienced barristers, now retired, who gave his opinion on the case gratuitously.”

Advise is usually worth what you are paying for it –

Free (gratuitous) advise costs nothing. I will leave you to join the “all too obvious” dots

Spendocrat – “Col believes that because neither of us know for sure, she should 'rot in jail for a long time'. Can't argue with that logic! “

I suggested she had be tried and by Indonesian court and due process found her guilty and presently sentenced to 20 years – subject to appeal.

That you suggest you know as much as the sentencing judges and suggest your opinion should prevail over theirs is only your ill informed opinion and personal delusions of grandeur – but posting it is nothing new from the likes of you

Ah but you see Col, I never claimed she was innocent! I merely am of the point of view that 20 years seemed wrong, in my OPINION, considering the lack of evidence. I believe it was you passing the all-knowing judgement of 'guilty guilty guilty'.

There's really no need for the personal attacks, friend, we're all just expressing our opinion here.

Peace!