Well well well, finally an opposing viewpoint to the majority of the population. I support corby and all, and her sentence is just, perhaps lenient, but i do believe that corbys defense team should have got the fingerprints off the bag, and been allowed to provide actual evidence. Currently the whole verdict was based on this "fact" = "Here, lies shapelles bodyboard. Inside, lies marijuana. This proves that she owns it".

I also think that this case has too much bias on one side (the emotional supporters who believe corby is innocent). It is suprising how a crying supposedly "innocent" young girl can attract so much support from Australians. Too bad we cant give the same attention to people in third world countries and other charities (Where does all of the donated money go anyway? To the webmasters piggybank thats where). I bet each webmaster is laughing his/her head off at the false promise of sending the money to support her family (besides, if it did go to support her family, why didn't it make the news?)

Now, just about the emotional supporters, i would like to say to you, dont you think it is a bit weird that both Schapelles father and brother were convicted of being involved in marijuana? Also if you think shes innocent and such a sweet little angel,she has also had several husbands as well.

Yes, all hail the sweet little angel. The media love her as well. All this protesting to the judges and the indonesian goverment WILL NOT aid in the releasing of corby. It will only hinder corby's chances of being set free. For once id like the media to show us a news report on the reasons why the indonesians/australians think she may be guilty, instead of bombarding us with crying/freaky eyes of shapelle corby and her cult followers saying "rah... rah.. free schapelle... rah rah"

Note i do not believe that she is guilty, but from reading a variety of articles on the case, she could very well be.

Excellent article Surya Deva, my sentiments exactly.

Third world poverty is the result of the exact same kind of corruption involved in the trial of Schappele Corby. So if the Corby case does force Indonesia to address its problems with corruption, then maybe the problems of poverty would subside.

Many of the people who scorn Corby are elitist blowhards who despise anyone from the lower classes. Just check out trade 125 comments on

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=3496

If we strip all the emotive and ignorant nonsense espoused by the pro and anti Corby mobs in and out of the media and on the Internet, we are left with very little substantial evidence upon which we base our opinions about the probability of her innocence or otherwise.

Under these circumstance, I'm surprised that nobody has cited the seminal statement on jurisprudence from Enlightenment philosopher Voltaire: "It is better to risk sparing a guilty person than to condemn an innocent one".

In cultural and historical terms, I think that the major cultural difference that underlies the respective approaches of the Australian and Indonesian judicial systems is that our culture underwent the Enlightenment, while Indonesia is still very much in the thrall of Muslim superstitious thinking. The fact that one of the judges is Christian makes little difference: without the Enlightenment, there isn't all that much that distinguishes Christianity from any other religious ideology.

Personally, I think it is highly likely that Corby was incorrectly convicted by the Indonesian court, which evidently holds (to paraphrase Voltaire) that: "It is better to risk condemning an innocent person than to spare a guilty one".

Unfortunately, this is an approach to justice that apparently now finds some favour in our own society. We are going backwards.

There comes a day in every woman’s life when she no longer feels invincible. This was Schapelle's such day.

I think some clarification is needed. Searching the web I find that presumption of innocence, even in drug cases, applies Australia and Indonesia. As this is a major point of emotive reaction perhaps the authors can clarify?
On the question of juries it is surely relevant to note that Indonesia follows the European system and anyone going to Indonesia presumably is aware of this?

One thing i would like to know, is why she was called a marijuana queen (in indonesia) when others have smuggled up to about 12kg of mari into their country.