Hello there FOXY and all you other great people...

I'll probably have my head bitten off, but here goes...; In my opinion this lady has received and served a punishment, far in excess of what she deserves. In NSW for an example, in my experience she would've probably received six on top, with a three, NPP ? Perhaps even less ? I'm not in possession of all the facts, but from what I've heard, I 'think' she's more than likely guilty, of trafficking in proscribed drugs.

Furthermore, if the media kept a much lower profile during her arrest and subsequent trial, she may well have received a lesser sentence ? I don't believe the Indonesian government particularly like to either 'lose face' or be denigrated or reviled at the hands of the Oz media.

Also, should Ms Corby decide to speaks out, and flagrantly berate the Indonesian Justice System, that in itself will not augur well, for those Aussies described as the 'Bali 9'. In fact EVERYONE should merely remain very quiet, until ALL appeal processes have been exhausted. More so those appealing long terms of imprisonment, and the two individuals seeking commutation of their individual death sentences.

The right time to make a big noise, and/or have the Prime Minister make a direct appeal for leniency to his Indonesian counterpart, is if ALL the appeal processes have failed, and the penalties upheld ? Otherwise there should be nothing said at this time !

Gosh, are there men being held as well? You don't say!

A sex change, latex strap-on tits and they can be innocent victims of the system too.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Looking at it logically from the evidence presented
Schapelle Corby travelled from Brisbane to Sydney
where at the air-port her board was opened to throw
in her flippers and her friends travelling with her
assured the authorities that there was nothing else
in the bag. They had witnessed the contents of the bag.

Any sensible person who travels to Indonesia and knows
the risk of the death penalty regarding dealing in drugs
would not when asked at the air-port by customs officials
the ownership of the bag, and opening the bag for the
customs officials, cannot possibly be responsible for the
contents of the bag when it left their sight at
Sydney air-port. It appears obviously that the drugs
were placed into the bag by the Sydney air-port bag handlers.

This information has been presented to the prosecutor in
Indonesia and blatantly was rejected by him. The judge of this
case - had
a reputation of strict adherence to the drug laws of
Indonesia no matter what the evidence, possibly to enhance his
status in the Indonesian political system. Based on these
facts it was grossly unjust to make a scape-goat of Schapelle
Corby. And no thanks to the Australian government - who didn't
appear to make any effort in her defence - as has been the
case in other instances regarding Australian citizens in the
past. As I stated earlier - I think she has paid her dues.

Hi Foxy,

Can I please complete that sentence:

"It appears obviously that the drugs were either placed into the bag by the Sydney air-port bag handlers or she put it there herself."

Try this experiment: walk around the block with a half-empty bag. Now try it again with four kilos extra in it, say four one-kilo bags of sugar. You will, I'm sure, notice the difference immediately.

Just trying to help:)

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

When Schapelle walked with her bag in Brisbane
- it was empty apart from
the board and flippers. The bag did not go onto the
plane with her luggage in Sydney - it went separately onto the
flight to Bali and it was only handled by baggage-handlers
and then it went straight into customs in Bali. Schapelle
did not walk around with her bag as you suggest.
But Thanks for trying to help. All this evidence was presented
in court to the Indonesian authorities. The judge simply did
not want nor was interested in hearing any of this evidence.

Hi (again) FOXY, LOUDMOUTH & ONTHEBEACH...

As I stated earlier, I'm not in receipt of all the facts, but prima facie, she does look to be guilty.

When Ms Corby presented herself at the Indonesian 'Primary Line', her baggage was inspected, and the prohibited material was found to be in her possession. Given the alleged size of the seizure (circa 4.5Kilos, 'Before Analysis Weight'), it would indicate, the seizure was of some significant volume and dimensions. And together with the weight, it would be hard for her to explain to the Indonesian authorities, she wasn't aware of the existence of this substance being in her belongings, or her 'boogie board bag' whatever you call it ?

You see FOXY, the interdiction of proscribed drugs...

'possession' the Actus reus (the criminal act) is a vital component necessary for a successful prosecution. However, 'an act itself' does not make a person guilty unless his mind be also guilty (the mens rea) (the criminal intent). Which is a cardinal principle of the Australian Criminal Law.

That's the basis for my assumption, that she's probably guilty as charged. However, as I indicated, I'm not in receipt of all the facts, therefore I could well be wrong ?