Schappelle Corby just got 20 years
- Thread starter Rukas
- Start date
Hmm 
What a disorganised court. With any luck she'll be able to transfer to an Australian prison. They were fairly firm in their judgment, I dare say an appeal wont make much difference. Twenty years is a long time, but it's better than a death sentence...
Guilty or not, I think the evidence and process was handle very poorly. That is a major concern. Also, if there is a baggage handling drug ring - that is very disturbing.
What a disorganised court. With any luck she'll be able to transfer to an Australian prison. They were fairly firm in their judgment, I dare say an appeal wont make much difference. Twenty years is a long time, but it's better than a death sentence... Guilty or not, I think the evidence and process was handle very poorly. That is a major concern. Also, if there is a baggage handling drug ring - that is very disturbing.
I think, based on how firm they were that she was guilty, 20 years was actually pretty lenient, considering it was supposed to be death or life in prison to begin with.
Still, its obviously too much for the crime, at least by our standards. Do you think if they allow her to serve it here she'll get a nice comfy cell?
Still, its obviously too much for the crime, at least by our standards. Do you think if they allow her to serve it here she'll get a nice comfy cell?
^ Like that man on the TV was saying, it is a lenient sentence by indonesian standards in regards to the crime, probably on account of her compliance and lack of criminal history. How was the behaviour of her mother - I cant imagine the frustration and horror, but still, to shout at the judge like that was ridiculous... couldnt even make out the verdict!
Prison is prison - it's gonna be fucking horrible anywhere, at least if she served here, she could be close to her family.
Prison is prison - it's gonna be fucking horrible anywhere, at least if she served here, she could be close to her family.
If it was me I can imagine my mom going off in the court room repeatidly, I would too.
When you look around and see how unorganized it is you act the same way.
But if she came here, would she have to serve in a real prison, or would they make it easier for her considering I think most people think the sentance isnt fair at all regardless of where it is served.
When you look around and see how unorganized it is you act the same way.
But if she came here, would she have to serve in a real prison, or would they make it easier for her considering I think most people think the sentance isnt fair at all regardless of where it is served.
^ I'm not saying it was unreasonable to be upset, I'm saying you still have to respect the judge's right to hand down the verdict. Let him speak... I mean, no-one could hear what he was saying. It obviously upset Schapelle, so I think they perhaps should have contained their outburst for her sake.
Who would make it easier and more importantly, why? She is a convicted offender. I'm not familiar with prison conditions, but I dare say it is unethical to show preferential treatment.
Who would make it easier and more importantly, why? She is a convicted offender. I'm not familiar with prison conditions, but I dare say it is unethical to show preferential treatment.
You don't have to respect the judges verdict. He made up his mind that she was guilty before it even started, i mean come on, he's handled 500 drug cases and found all 500 guilty, so she was guilty no matter what.
How the fuck you going to give Amrosi who openly and happily admits to killing 200 aussies 2 years and jail, and give shappel 20years?.
Its Indo's and Bali's loss though, because already Austrailan travel agents have started boycoting deals to bali already, (on john laus today). So they'll be fucked. Howard should take back that 1billion dollar aid we just gave them if they don't agree to a prisoner exchange.
How the fuck you going to give Amrosi who openly and happily admits to killing 200 aussies 2 years and jail, and give shappel 20years?.
Its Indo's and Bali's loss though, because already Austrailan travel agents have started boycoting deals to bali already, (on john laus today). So they'll be fucked. Howard should take back that 1billion dollar aid we just gave them if they don't agree to a prisoner exchange.
For a crime you probably didnt commit?
Like he said though, the defence laid out an unconvincing case. Rather than appealing to judge's compassion (crying in court whatever) I really think they should have focussed on the contamination of evidence... then again, we dunno what was said in court. Still doesnt make sense to charge her with importing marijuana, when they did not know the weight of the bag before and after - at best it appears to be possession of banned substance... I was thinking about the Bali Bombers as well.... doesnt make sense, but it is a very different legal system.
Like he said though, the defence laid out an unconvincing case. Rather than appealing to judge's compassion (crying in court whatever) I really think they should have focussed on the contamination of evidence... then again, we dunno what was said in court. Still doesnt make sense to charge her with importing marijuana, when they did not know the weight of the bag before and after - at best it appears to be possession of banned substance... I was thinking about the Bali Bombers as well.... doesnt make sense, but it is a very different legal system.
lmao take back 1 billion dollars in aid because an Australian got a harsh sentence for a crime they [supposedly] committed? Be quiet.
You had it your way with the sentencing of the Bali bombers. None of you complained with the legal system there now did you? But when an Aussie is under scrutiny you're all quick to hate their legal system? That's utter crap. You can't have it all your way.
You had it your way with the sentencing of the Bali bombers. None of you complained with the legal system there now did you? But when an Aussie is under scrutiny you're all quick to hate their legal system? That's utter crap. You can't have it all your way.
How can we know? this is what I really didn't like about the way the Australian public reacted to this case, everybody assumed she was innocent, and the media really played this angle well. I mean the stupidity of some of the polls I saw during the trial, "Do you think Schappelle Corby is guilty?" and the fact that something like 92% of people believed she wasn't is astounding, how does some person sitting at home watching some biased Channel 9 media coverage, which presents none of the evidence clearly, really know if she is guilty or innocent?
It's sad that Indonesia and Bali will lose a LOT of tourism from Australia because of this, hopefully when the Australian public reaches their senses and sees that this girl most probably did know the consequences of her act before she transported this 4kg of marijuana, they will keep travelling to Bali and Indonesia, as the country really does need the money.
As you said it is a different legal system, unlike ours, they don't exactly present evidence like we do, rather the judge is in charge of finding out all the facts, the defence and prosecution are pretty much irrelevant.
I really don't think someone should go to prison for smuggling marijuana, and I'm sure a lot of people would agree, or at least something a little more lenient. But she really did get off with a light sentence under the circumstances, people have to understand that she most probably would have known the consequences of her act, and still did it anyway, so I feel no sympathy for her. The way this country has reached out to support her even when it really looks like she is guilty troubles me. Why doesn't the public show this sympathy for Nguyen Tuong Van facing the death penalty in Singapore for importing illicit drugs? Why is his story not even getting mentioned earlier than page 5 in the newspaper? Is it because his name isn't one that rolls off the average Australian's tongue? But most importantly, where is the Government's support for him? I saw that they were offering Corby lawyers to help in her appeal, why not for him? I'm tired of this country's underlying racism that subtly rises to the surface forcing the nation's leaders to pander to it.
An innocent person would have not acted in the way she did leading up to the verdict, just too bad people don't see this, and not only that but I'm sure Australia and Indonesia's already weak relations won't be helped by this stupid mistake, the anti-Asian sentiment in this country is already sickening enough, I just hope it doesn't get to a point where its acceptable on a conscious level.
It's sad that Indonesia and Bali will lose a LOT of tourism from Australia because of this, hopefully when the Australian public reaches their senses and sees that this girl most probably did know the consequences of her act before she transported this 4kg of marijuana, they will keep travelling to Bali and Indonesia, as the country really does need the money.
As you said it is a different legal system, unlike ours, they don't exactly present evidence like we do, rather the judge is in charge of finding out all the facts, the defence and prosecution are pretty much irrelevant.
I really don't think someone should go to prison for smuggling marijuana, and I'm sure a lot of people would agree, or at least something a little more lenient. But she really did get off with a light sentence under the circumstances, people have to understand that she most probably would have known the consequences of her act, and still did it anyway, so I feel no sympathy for her. The way this country has reached out to support her even when it really looks like she is guilty troubles me. Why doesn't the public show this sympathy for Nguyen Tuong Van facing the death penalty in Singapore for importing illicit drugs? Why is his story not even getting mentioned earlier than page 5 in the newspaper? Is it because his name isn't one that rolls off the average Australian's tongue? But most importantly, where is the Government's support for him? I saw that they were offering Corby lawyers to help in her appeal, why not for him? I'm tired of this country's underlying racism that subtly rises to the surface forcing the nation's leaders to pander to it.
An innocent person would have not acted in the way she did leading up to the verdict, just too bad people don't see this, and not only that but I'm sure Australia and Indonesia's already weak relations won't be helped by this stupid mistake, the anti-Asian sentiment in this country is already sickening enough, I just hope it doesn't get to a point where its acceptable on a conscious level.
Amara what are you on about? they weren't allowed to use any of the evidence, the judges refused to use any fingerprints, and didn't allow any of her witnesses. A joke.
illmatic, we didn't get it our way, that scum of the earth bomber only got 2years for openly killing 200 aussies, again joke
hitemup, your right we don't know if she's guilty or not, i'm more mad at the fact that corby gets 20years with basically no evidence of her drug smuggling aside from the drugs being in her bag, and some dirty peace of shit that killed hundreds and admited it gets 2years, i mean come on now.
illmatic, we didn't get it our way, that scum of the earth bomber only got 2years for openly killing 200 aussies, again joke
hitemup, your right we don't know if she's guilty or not, i'm more mad at the fact that corby gets 20years with basically no evidence of her drug smuggling aside from the drugs being in her bag, and some dirty peace of shit that killed hundreds and admited it gets 2years, i mean come on now.
They said at the trial today that fingerprints were not taken because there were too many to be conclusive or some shit. I am saying, this line of reasoning - gaps in the physical evidence should have been pursued, although, as they said possession is the key... how possession equates to importation without the backing of physical evidence amazes me...
I thought they did allow some of her witnesses, but because they were based on hearsay the judges did not give them great weight when determining the verdict, which they are more than entitled to do.
I thought they did allow some of her witnesses, but because they were based on hearsay the judges did not give them great weight when determining the verdict, which they are more than entitled to do.
nope they didn't allow any of her evidence,, fingerprints should of been used,, plus her witnesses, + all the footage they had of corby actually opening up the bag in sydney airport to put the flippers inside. 500 drug cases all 500 were found guilty, i think that shows how much they care about justice. Bali and indo will suffer, why we give so much money to this country is beyond me. When half of their people die of starvation because of aussies boycotting this place maybe then the judges will wake up.
Groobz you're a hypocrite.
You care so much for Corby yet you dont give 2 shits about David Hicks - when he has been IMPRISONED on no basis, he HAS NOT been charged, he HAS NOT received a fair trial, evidence against him seems to be LACKING. You said that because Corby got convicted Australia should retract its aid to Bali, so using this logic shouldnt Australia break away from such tight knit relations with the US?
This is double standards. Corby was convicted and was VERY lucky to get 20 years and not death. You wouldnt even bring up the fact that the judge has convicted all 500 drug cases if Corby was acquitted - that wouldnt even spring into your mind. You only feel it's an injustice because Corby, an Australian is involved.
You care so much for Corby yet you dont give 2 shits about David Hicks - when he has been IMPRISONED on no basis, he HAS NOT been charged, he HAS NOT received a fair trial, evidence against him seems to be LACKING. You said that because Corby got convicted Australia should retract its aid to Bali, so using this logic shouldnt Australia break away from such tight knit relations with the US?
This is double standards. Corby was convicted and was VERY lucky to get 20 years and not death. You wouldnt even bring up the fact that the judge has convicted all 500 drug cases if Corby was acquitted - that wouldnt even spring into your mind. You only feel it's an injustice because Corby, an Australian is involved.
Mate, your right, I don't give two shits about hicks because he trained with the taliban and fought against us, he lost, he was captured sent to prison like all the other scumbags, and thats where he should stay, wait in line for his trial, like the thousand others who are trying to think of excuses as to why they aided the enemy. So that and corbies case are nothing a like.
I'm angry at the Indo judicial system because its backward. I know we can't all live in civil countries, but for the judge just to deny corbies defence any use of her witnesses, and all the tapes ect is a joke. But I suppose I shouldn't expect much from some of these countries, I hope howard takes a bit more of a hard line stance on this.
I'm angry at the Indo judicial system because its backward. I know we can't all live in civil countries, but for the judge just to deny corbies defence any use of her witnesses, and all the tapes ect is a joke. But I suppose I shouldn't expect much from some of these countries, I hope howard takes a bit more of a hard line stance on this.
Oh yeh? What about the Western judicial system? Hicks HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN OF DOING ANYTHING. Again, where is the fucking evidence? Look at you making these stupid allegations like you know everything. Who told you he trained with the taliban and other terrorist organisations? What he is accused of doesn't mean it is indesputable fact - oh but it's the American's who have arrested him which makes it all OK right? THAT makes it fair? No. That is complete bullshit. It completely contradicts what the american judicial system is based on - innocent until proven guilty. Again i'll say this:
1) He has been imprisoned for over 3 years
2) He has not received a fair trial
3) He has not been charged for anything
It seems like just because the Americans say so he is guilty - which you completely swallow up as fact because the Americans are never wrong, right?
How about the example provided by Mamdouh Habib? He was a "suspected" terrorist and was arrested on absolutely no grounds - just like Hicks. He wasn't charged, he had done no wrong. But they imprisoned HIM for fucking TWO YEARS. Is that a fair judicial system? Two whole years spent isolated from his family - he was not allowed to communicate with his family. And you say the Balinese judicial system is backward? How can you defend this? By the way, there was absolutely no apology for this wrongful imprisonment.
Oh and just to let you know ALL THE BALI BOMBERS WERE SENTENCED TO THE DEATH PENALTY , as suggested by the Sydney Morning Herald, and countless other reputable sources. So i really have no idea where you got the whole notion that Amrozi was sentenced to 2 years jail.
I suggest you read this article:
http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/05/26/1116950819084.html?oneclick=true
This article absolutely sums up your position, and shows how much of a fallacy it is. Ill copy and paste some examples and put them in italics.
..The Government response reflects the popular hysteria in Australia asserting Corby's innocence and condemning Indonesia: she is obviously innocent and the Indonesian system is obviously pathetic; their judicial system stinks; I will never travel to Bali again. The sense of aggressive certainty in these assertions is disturbing, for several reasons...
"she is obviously innocent and the Indonesian system is obviously pathetic" rings a bell.
..First, it is based on a conviction of Corby's innocence that leaves no room for a judicial proceeding that will examine the evidence and conceivably come up with a different view. Instead, it assumes the system must be at fault, and so Indonesia's very different and emergent civil law judiciary has been grossly misrepresented and demonised...
that rings a bell as well.
...When Bali bombers Amrozi, Muhklas and Imam Samudra were sentenced to death by the same court that is trying Corby, this was widely celebrated here, with some Australians offering to pull the trigger or burn them alive, and our Government indicating that execution was appropriate. In light of this, how can our Government now claim that death is a barbaric punishment, as popular opinion has it, if it is imposed on Corby or, as is more likely, the Bali nine?...
So the Indonesian system is great when the bali bombers are sentenced to death, but it is primitive when an Australian gets sentenced 20 years, which is widely deemed as extremely lenient considering mosst drug criminals are sentenced to death?
-------
Seems like you're caught up in the hysteria too, groobz
I don't know much about this case but from what I gather she was sentenced to 20 years for (ostensibly) importing 4kg of Cannabis and supposedly this was a lenient sentence? If so, it's an absolute farce. Even if she is guilty such a harsh sentence (and it could have been worse) is laughable considering how Cannabis is barely even a Class C drug.
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.