Just wanted to ask your thoughts on this whole Schappelle Corby case. Do you think she's innocent or what?
Why do you think most of Australia thinks she's not guilty? I don't know why there's so much anger over this when we don't know the truth. We don't know what evidence there is. Sure she said it was put in her bag, but how do we know that? Just because she said it doesn't make it so, right?
I'm not saying she's guilty, but I see a lot of people upset over her jail sentence because they believe she's innocent. Are their hopes getting the better of them?
Also, do you agree with people's new "hate" for Bali/Indonesia? And what about how a lot of people want their Tsunami donations back? What do those people have to do with a court case? Jeebus! Honestly, some people just don't think things through. :rolleyes:

Personally I find the backlash justified. I nearly broke down at work when I watched the verdict on Friday, huddled around the television with my workmates. Prior to the trial some of the 'jocks' were making light of her situation, but when they saw her reaction, at how devastated she was, there was this eerie silence as though her plight transcended natural teenage apathy.

I've followed this case intensely, having been interested in it from the very start. I won't deny that my interest at first was brought on by her attractive looks, but as I delved deeper into the whole situation I started to care for an innocent person, not just a girl with a fair sized rack. There is no doubt in my mind that she is innocent.

I have argued over this case in nearly every web forum I frequent, passionately defending her and sharing what I know about the case. In my opinion, the evidence that the prosecution presented the judges was not sufficient enough to warrant a conviction, and definitely not a 20-year sentence.

Key evidence was destroyed and key defence witnesses were ignored. Personally I believe the prosecution was too intent on making an example of Schapelle, and the judges were only too ready to be part of this scheme.

Lastly, while I feel for those suffering in Aceh and surrounding regions, my anger concerning the absurd inconsistency of the Indonesian law system has transcended these feelings. Abu Bakar Bashir recieves a 2 year jail sentence for aiding the deaths of 88 Australians. Schapelle is unconvincingly convicted of importing 4.1kg of marijuana and is given 20 years... and now the government wants more. Fuck you, Indonesia.

Knowing my $20 will pass through the hands of Indonesian authorities is all the reason I need for wanting it back in my pocket, where I can it to a much worthier cause... getting Schapelle home.

I hope you're still pursuing journalism; Moggo - you'd make a good lackey because not only are you capable of writing sensationalist bullshit, you actually believe in the stuff you write. Only an self-righteous fool would fail to take the plight of one measly individual in perspective of the far more important things that this case represents.

Moggo highlighted something cardinal to this whole thing that on it's lonesome demonstrates just how pathetic the media and the lemmings that follow it are.

And that's where it all started guys, right there. Australian Sweetheart vs. The Big Bad Foreigners. International relations, abstract questions of international rights, economic ramifications, and mounds of evidence all got whittled down to something that fools like Moggo can digest and relate to. Now here's a headline that people can't be fucked reading as they pass their way to work:

"Complex international relations between Indonesia and Australia related to recent drives for economic bi-lateral agreements with neighbouring nations and Australia's decision to send more troops to Iraq may have had some level of influence on a court case involving a big fat lesbian person who probably smugged drugs but might not have, we're really not sure right now, as cultural differences between Australia and Indonesia may have distilled the outcome."

Eye-catching.

A few things:

• This issue is far, far more complex than many people make it out to be.
• You're just a random opinionated dickhead sitting at home, and you don't know enough to determine if she's innocent or guilty. Whether or not you believe she's innocent doesn't mean anything to anyone.
• The social and political ramifications of this are greater than the needs of one individual.
• On that, "Do the ends justify the means?" is a fair-game argument... however, deciding this was up to the discretion of the Indonesian government. What we feel is right doesn't matter.
• Everything that reaches your ears or eyes, with a case like this, has passed through a filter. This filter helps to promote this idea that the situation is only black and white.
• While Chappelle's future is a sad one, it's far more important that we question our relations to Indonesia and possibly our own methods of preventing smugglers into the country.

And to finish:

I'm not saying I think she should've been jailed. I'm saying I don't know. I am accepting that the information I have is limited and always will be - and so choose not to form an opinion over whether or not the sentence was the correct thing to do; be that 'morally right' or 'politically right'.

Edit: Also, Moggo, read this post a few times. If you miss the point completely and fill your post with verbose retorts, I won't bother replying.

I don't get the rationale of not giving your dollar to Indonesia. Not only will this not help Corby, but it will only prove to further hurt innocent people. Excellent.

Key witnesses have also been ignored by the Australian media and public - it hasn't just been the Indonesian courts. Such as the 5 Indonesian custom officials that stated that Corby wouldn't open one section of the bag, the section with the marijuana in it, or that they only checked her bags because she was looking so nervous in the customs area. Still, they must be lying because they're Asian.

Why would someone smuggle drugs into Bali? Surely the marijuana would have had a much higher street value in Australia than it did in Bali. This supports the belief that perhaps the drugs were meant to go from Sydney to Melbourne.

What I find absolutly rediculous is that they cant prosecute the bali bomber with all the evidence they had, but they can convict her on the basis that "its her bag, its her drugs".

Which ones were those? Are you talking about that prisoner who was flown to Bali to testify?

I think the worst thing out of all of this, is that the media has provided biased coverage of the whole event, and therefore the majority of Australians base an opinion on these supposed 'facts', leading to the unnecessary racist reactions by many Australians, things like Boycot Bali, we want our donations back etc :rolleyes: .

Ask yourself this, if such a case occurred in Australian and the offender was an Australian would people still think she was guilty? Probably not.

I think she's tempting fate by appealing.

...

On another note. Is she stuck in that Indonesian prison till 2007? As the appeal process takes 18 months, Australia cannot negotiate a prisoner swap until the appeal process is finished?

I already hated Indonesia for various reasons, this event isn't about to change that.

I'm not going to fight with you over this because you have ulterior motives anyway, and everything I say that you regard as incorrect will be magnified and exaggerated due to our 'history'. Therefore, I'm going to attend to the points you brought up in the most respectful way possible.

I don't agree with that belief though. Too me, her life is more important than dilpomatic issues that could adversely affect Australia. My anger has been fuelled by the hypocrisy of the case, and I don't see how anyone could detach themselves from the way she is feeling... sadly, people seem to be able to do that. It's just not something I'm able to do. I'm more affected by human suffering than dilpomatic suffering, etc. And before you say it, I'm well aware of the 140 Australians in overseas jails, and the two of whom are on death row. It's only this case though, where the accused's innocence is so obvious that it struck a chord. Who else remembers those 2 Australian teenagers in an American jail after the held up a bank in a ski-town about 3 months ago?

I do not feel the same amount of empathy for the Bali 9, however, because they are clearly guilty. I do feel sorry that they could be so foolish, but otherwise, there's no sympathy there.

If you can provide me with these mounds of evidence then I'll happily reply to that comment, but as you cannot, it is not worth a reply.

I'm also well aware of the ramifications that this case could have economically, diplomatically and internationally for both countries, probably a hell of alot more than you do. Again though, human life before diplomatic hostility, etc. Assuming I only care because Schapelle has a nice pair of tits makes you the fool, because I happily admitted that this is where my first interest arose from, but that my interests quickly moved to the injustice and hypocrisy involved in the case. If you can't accept this, then that is your own problem. Don't underestimate me Aden, however much it will help your cause to do so.

I agree. That's why I'm glad I took the time to gather as much information as possible before I made a judgement. I'm glad I excluded myself from those groups pf people who, when they hear that Schapelle has been to Bali 5 times since 2001, that she must be guilty. Or that because marijuana is worth more in Australia then she must be innocent, because no-one would take it to Bali where it would be worth less.

I was never under the impression that it did. Just like how you should be under no illusions that your heckling will have any effect on my outspoken nature, or my feelings on the case. There was no real point in saying that, now was there?

If the needs of this person were handled correctly in the first place, we wouldn't be experiencing the Bali backlash and all those other economic effects Bali will have to endure over the following years. If they hadn't DESTROYED the evidence within hours of finding it, they wouldn't be suffering the wrath of ordinary, touristy Australians who have crossed out Bali and pencilled in New Zealand as their holiday destination this year. So that's void.

I ask you this, Mr Date. In what way were those pictures of Schapelle Corby, realising that she had been convicted and sentenced to 20 years, ever filtered? What part of her smacking herself in the forehead with disbelief filtered? And since when were Roseleigh and Mercedes Corby's outbursts in court ever filtered?

That's all fair enough, but I'd love to know what you think of Bakir Bashir's 2 year sentence for conspiring to murder 88 Australians?

That's correct. She'll be there as long as any appeal takes, at the very least. A High Court appeal will take around 6 months, a Supreme Court appeal, if the High Court appeal is rejected, would add another 6-12 months. And seeing as though Indonesia wants Corby to serve at least 1/3 of her sentence in Indonesia, it could be a very long time before we "see Corby posing in FHM." :rolleyes:

Answer: A kg of marijuana sold by a westerner to a westerner in Bali will fetch $20,000. In Aus you'd pay $8000.

source*

*You may have to be a member, it's free though.


Aussie girl get's a jail sentence for smuggling drugs into Indonesia. OUTRAGE!

Aussie Man get's locked up on the other side of the world without charge or trial. Meh. (David Hicks).

Foreign Man get's locked up in Australia without charge or trial. Meh. (Peter Qasim, asylum seeker, been in detention for 6 years.

Proves the masses love to get spoonfed by media propaganda texta. ;)

Do you listen to HACK on Triple J by any chance? :P


I'd like to say my opinion on the matter but I'm sure I'll just get flamed by one person or another about my opinions being wrong, etc, etc...so I don't think I'll bother for now.

But a quick summary of my opinion: 65% of me is saying she's innocent, but the other 35% is suspisious....

No. What's HACK?

Apparently, her father has a Body Board shop in Bali, and a few times a year he gets one of his kids (be it Schappelle or her syblings) to take a board full of weed over there. I'm not sure if this is true, but take a look at her family defending her on the TV -- the guy couldn't string two words together, and the girl was very much so the same.

In the end, there's no solid proof she did it, or didn't do it, but here's a thing; when the Indonesian airport guys asked her if she packed everything in the bag and she was the only one who packed it, why did she reply "yes"?

Thats not a reasonable comment in any way at all. Whether she's guilty or not, its not hard to drum up some tears at the prospect of 20 years in prison.

I haven't formed an opinion, because I know I don't have anywhere near enough facts. I think none of us do, and if we are going to discuss an issue, it should be whether Indonesia should be allowed to convict someone where there is reasonable doubt of their guilt.

How can we affect that sort of issue? Stop giving them donations and tourist dollars. I'm not saying you should so it, I'm just saying that if those issues concern you then thats something they won't ignore.

I personally would prefer to make donations to people in need, because I separate the people's opinion from the government's opinion. I don't agree with everything our government does, and I hate it when everyday people who are essentially the same get hassled by the actions of the minority who represent them.

I wouldn't go to indonesia though, never had any desire to, and now I plain wouldn't go even if I did have a desire to.

It's their daily current affairs half hour.
I asked cause that part of your post about Qasim and Hicks was worded alot like the way they said it on hack the other day. :P

Speaking of Hack, they were the first of media to pursue the whole baggage handlers issue, and soon after, the other forms of media picked it up and went with it. :P

I still don't like you, but thanks for arguing more respectfully than I did.

I think much of what you say really just reflects a 'belief' that she is innocent, one that's founded by her reactions, personality, and appearence yet supported by whatever evidence you can find. The arguments brought up in this thread (by others, not me) are probably enough to suggest that the Australian public doesn't really have a concensus feeling on whether or not she's innocent. There simply isn't enough concrete evidence to suggest either way.

I was only implying that the Newspapers are only going to present information that supports their opinion. Granted, you've done your reading (and I find that impressive), but any sources you read won't be capable of offering a true and fair view.

Cough :P

I'm saying that whatever you read, there are more things you don't know. Even Texta's article shows you don't know everything.

I'm trying to promote a view, not so much trying to change things (come on Moggo, I more than anyone know that until I grow tits, I can't change the way you feel about anything). I think my view is pretty reasonable and well founded so I put it forward. However I don't think it's justified that people decide whether she's innocent or guilty.

On the other hand, they have sent a clear message to Australians that drug smuggling will not be tolerated. If Australia seperates itself from Indonesia then they may force themselves out of connections with ASEAN, which could become a potential economic superpower in the leagues of the EU. If Australia has bad relations with ASEAN they could potentially have higher trade tariffs leading to a loss of potential economic gains in the billions.

Australia has alot to gain from trade with Indonesia and ASEAN. If we hold a grudge, we're not doing much for the long-term benefit of the economy. I can assure you that once this dies down, and a few years pass, you will see Australia forming trade pacts with Indonesia.

They were filtered because they were placed in a paticular context, because they were seperated from other images, because the angle was close and background voices described it as the greatest tragedy in the history of mankind. I wouldn't be surprised if some tear-jerking music was used either. Don't think you're immune to this stuff, noone is (even I'm not... which is why I avoid seeing it)

I'm well aware of (and even mentioned) that an example was likely being made of her, hence why her sentence might be unfair. The question is whether or not this is justified; hence the "do the ends justify the means?" argument comes into play.

Unless I have the deciding proof, then yes, my opinion is just a belief backed by whatever evidence I can find. I think that's natural though. When people have a belief they try and find as much proof as they can to prove their stance as more credible. As someone who has no influence on the case, that's really all I can do.

I think there is definitely a general consensus that she is innocent among Australians. The Channel 9 special, watched by something like 2 million people nationwide, was inundated with calls apparently, and in the end there was a 93% belief in her innocence. This is hardly proof of a consensus, but it is a good indication, and indications really all we have to go on. If you're too believe the papers (which most of you don't :P) the backlash has been unprecendented, and even independant organisations and aid agencies have encountered amazing amounts of anger and vitriol since the verdict. If anything, July 10, Schapelle's birthday, will be the best indication of where this country stands. However, just by driving down my local suburb (Sunnybank) you get an idea by the signs on the side of the road.

It remains to be seen how many people think she's innocent, and then how many people have doubts but will protest anyway because of the severity of the sentence.

Exactly, which is why this case never should have gotten 2 weeks in court.

I realise that, and I made sure, in my first post at least, to precede any belief of mine with a "personally" or 'I believe' just to make sure it wasn't perceived that I was pushing an agenda.

I know that, which is why I said this:

I've argued before on why she's guilty, but mainly my delusion lies with the hypocrisy in the trial, and the fact that there is reasonable doubt in her case to warrant an acquittal. I think I was in such a fired up mood when I blasted Mav last Friday because of what I'd just seen on television, so you're right that the media furthered my anger... I don't think anyone should deny that the media is basically in control of this country, but I respect the fact that most of us here are intelligent enough to look past the agendas the mass media promotes. Regardless of where the media stands on this one, and when they will inevitably forget the case in the coming weeks, I will still follow the case and maintain my belief that the case should be thrown out, and that she should be sent home... on a boat.

Everything you said in the first 3 lines there was incorrect, and then in the last sentence you basically admitted you hadn't seen it. That then, was a bit of a waste of time for both of us.

Oh, I'm not, believe me. I just don't think it was possible to fake the imagery of Schapelle following the verdict on Friday. She seemed so totally unprepared for it that it makes you wonder. Regardless of what one thinks of the media's influence, Schapelle's reaction were, in my opinion, 100% genuine disbelief and devastation, caused by unimaginable feelings of one being unjustly treated.

I didn't say she didn't fake it, I said that it was no filtered or manafactured by the media. Christ.

Wait a sec. Let me dig my teeth into this one:

OH MY FUCKING GOD. ARE YOU THAT STUPID? Do you think the case would have been stretched out this far if it were true that Mr Corby solicited his children to smuggle drugs?! I pray for your soul JJames. No wonder so many people don't respect you, you idiot.

Lynx, you said that she smacked her head in disbelief at the conviction, and that was unfiltered media. What I'm saying to you, is that her emotional response could be toward the sentence, and not a feeling that she's been unjustly punished.

Now that I think about it though, even though you used the word "disbelief" you probably meant just a feeling of "I can't believe this is happening," rather than "I can't believe this is happening because I am right" as I read it.

I don't know if she's guilty, or what, but I still don' t get why people say that there's not enough proof to prove her guilt. Here's 3 points that the Australian public seems to overlook:

- 5 Indonesian custom officials said that she wouldn't open one section of her bag, the section with the drugs, and that she was acting very nervous in customs (this is why they checked her bags). This, somewhat, proves a level of guilt. These people are government officials, and their claims should be considered. We would believe, in the most part, the claims of government officials, so why's this any different? The claims of government officials, or that of some prisoner in Australia? Jeez, if I was a Balinese judge guess which one I'd believe?

- It was her bag. People say that it's possible that drugs were placed in her bag, yet people fail to back this up with solid evidence. Where are the stats for this happening? How can this realistically be judged, and isn't just an assumption? Is it therefore not that hard to see where the judge is coming from?

- She isn't the innocent person the media has hoped to depict. This is obviously impossible to fully prove, and is pretty much just friends-of-friends talking, but some of the stories, such as the Jap hostess thingo, seem credible enough. The media makes out that it's a massive stretch for a white Australian girl to be drug smuggling - it's not.

As for the sentence, South-East Asia has a drug problem, and they need to crack-down on it. Whilst the sentence is seen to be harsh in Australia, the situation in Indonesia must be taken into consideration.

I really don't think that this is as black-and-white as many people are saying that it is.

----

I don't know what Moggo said in reply to your statement, JJJames, but i do know that what you said was completely heresay, and was probably completely, or mostly wrong.
You're acting like a 12 year old, Take your eyes of the Nintendo. I thought you were alright, but it seems you just want any reason to jump down someones throat. Gee, I'd love new proof to her being guilty, just to shut you up., that was pretty childish.

Anyway. My mum said that a Mexican lady was caught with 15kg and was only given a sentence of 7 years, so i don't see how they gave Corby 20 years for having only 4kg found in her possession. Maybe the Mexican pleaded guilty and that got her a lighter sentence.

It's just stupid. He has no proof, so he calls me a fool for laying down what everyone in Australia layed down - rumors.

JJJames, perhaps you could learn something about discussing and not make the same mistake again.
You screwed up, and got canned for it.
Take it, move on..

I went to the DontShootSchappelle.com forums, and posted a thread questioning her innocence, and why everyone seems to think she's innocent with no grounds behind it. Within 30 seconds, the thread was deleted and shorty thereafter, I was banned. WTF!? Very open minded they are.

She has the SAME birthday as me.
I really don't see the outrage against a whole country(which has a shitload of people), when the decision was made by three of them. The other thing is people wanting their donation money back, what utter twats, the suffering of one is somehow out ways the suffering of many because of the geographic location of her birth. WTF really so she's Australian, what about all the Indonesians sent to jail for many years and all the other foreigners? I take no pride in a place I was born in. It makes no sense to do so and how could you when there are many things we have done or let happen at the least whch are shameful or reproachful.

Just something that came to my mind when I first learnt of the verdict; "She got off pretty light considering she was going to get Life in Gaol or to be shot by a firing squad"

I think that would also explain why she wasn't as upset as her parents were...all that time in a cell, I know I would have been preparing for the worst.

Who knows, but that still not a light sentence. I think Hello brings up a good point;

I brought that up ages ago >_>

Natural yes, but it's far from the objectivity that should be applied in passing judgement on a jail sentence. Ideally you'd have based your first impression on facts derived from a variety of sources, rather than media sensationalism. It's just not a good starting point for forming an opinion.

So the 'demographic' tested were people that had recently watched a Channel 9 news report? Ouch, that stings. What about those of us who don't participate in dumb phone polls? Might they be more inclined to see the ambiguity of the situation?

Also, not only is 93% not even a credible consensus, it's not even a consensus at all. This isn't O.J. Simpson, there's a clear level of public and media ambiguity here.

Allow me to rephrase - there isn't enough concrete evidence available to the public to suggest either way. There are things we don't know.

Whether or not the trial is justified is a completely seperate argument to her innocence. Also, the justification can be found in the crack-down on drugs that Hello mentioned. Sure, it might not have been the fair thing to do, but it might have been the smart thing to do.

Well, most of us here on the forum are... which is probably why it's not a 93% innocence vote in here. I mean, that alone demonstrates the huge amount of media hogwash. Granted, you've done your research, but most of the people on your street probably haven't.

Well, of you want to get formal about definitions then yeah, they were incorrect.

The footage alone obviously didn't have music (obviously), but the clip would have been placed on a variety of networks and news programs. Any one could choose to use some music with the clip.

I agree that they are genuine, but I don't think they implicate innocence.

Hell, when someone slaps their forhead, it's normally when they're saying "STUPID, STUPID!". Not that I'd read into it that much, just offering alternative interpretations of a genuine emotional reaction.



Moggo, generally I still think you're basing most of what you -think- of the case on your own emotions. I know you're not the rational guy I am and that's not how you live, but it is how the courts work and how they work best. It's about weighing evidence, individual cases, and potential sentence implications, to work out the best course of action.

:lol: Talk about censorship!

I guess the url 'DontShootSchappelle' pretty much gives you the reason.

Regardless of how emotional you get about this situation, this kind of behaviour is not appropriate. JJJames is entitled to his opinion and while you have every right to disagree you do not have the right to be abusive and condesending. Further comments of this nature will be dealt with with exceptionally harshly.

Might as well call it wethinkschappelleisinnocenteventhoughwehavenoprooftobackourbeliefsup.com :P

Change one word and the Indonesians have their own website.

I'm going to come right out and say it, I think you're deliberately trying to be arseholes just so you can give yourselves a reason to ban me. I called him an idiot. THAT.IS.IT. And you Texta, from giving me ways of how to get out of getting into trouble, to now sending me bullshit PM's with nonsense little sentences. You guys should nickname me 'Deep Throat'. Texta can play Nixon.

This forum is dead and stuggling for activity as it is. Getting rid of members who have been loyal since its inception is not the way to go. You may not like me because I'm willing to stick it to authority or say what I think, but stop being pedantic, because this is a bloody internt forum. It is not real, it has no bearing on life. JJames is not going to go and have a whinge to his Mum because I called him an idiot. This forum is for unsocial bastards to talk about absolute rubbish each day because no-one in their own lives gives a toss, and I'm one of these bastards.

This is getting unbelievably silly now. Get a life and stop worrying what happens in make believe. I'm like Sam Newman in a way. Says what he thinks, says what is true, but people hate it because the truth is offensive to softies. So he gets banned, but when he's gone people realise what they miss. A bit of friggin' objectivity.

Someone goes into the Amazing Race thread and ruins it for fans like Hello and Mav. HELLO CALLS THE GUY A FUCKING MORON? Did he get a warning for it? See? You have better things to worry about. (And for the record, no, Hello shouldn't get a warning. Hello was exactly right.

The mods are ruining Evo from the top down. I'm committed to helping it get back on its feet. It's dying in the arse at the moment. Did I get a congrats for furthering discussion in the Corby thread? For debating with Sytadel respectably? Why not? It gives reasons for people to post, and to come back, but you want to cut this progress off at the knees because I called someone an idiot? Get your priorities straight! Sytadel called me a fool and, indirectly, a dickhead in his first post. I assume he got a warning, then? I doubt it. :rolleyes:

This is pathetic. Have a good look at yourselves. You didn't ban me when I came back because you knew that having me around was healthy for the life of the boards. Do not deny that this was the case. I've done absolutely nothing to challenge my right to be here. Calling someone an idiot does not even warrant a warning.

If you want to me to stop being a thorn in your side, then stop treating me with a seperate set of standards. Go throw a warning at Hello and Sytadel for their heinous crimes against the laws of nothing, and THEN I might consider taking you seriously.

Stop guessing, Moggo. You cannot see their warnings, for all you know we did warn them. Admittedly Sytadel wasn't warned, but he has been now (and before I saw this post so keep your mouth shut, sunshine. Also it was Manny who said it was unfair that he not get one and you do, heh). I haven't seen Hello's post, but I'll go look at it, say "hmmm" and give him a warning if it'll help you sleep at night.

If people seem to get away with something it's probably because they don't do it often. This is why Syt wasn't warned initially- he only lurks now (and not very often either), and probably only bothered posting because it was you. Yes I know you'll have something to say about that, but someone like Hello will never get banned from warnings if he keeps up his current attitude, because he doesn't do bad things often enough. If he ever gets a second warning, bets are on that his first one would've been removed by that time. Your warnings didn't get removed because you seemed to earn one every other week, and when they were removed that one time, you almost instantly started acting up because you had room to breathe again.

Your new account was left alone because you made maybe 1 or 2 posts, then left. Then you came back a few weeks later, another 1 or 2 posts. Only know have you decided to come back in full force. You're being given a chance here, aren't you? Sure, you'll be banned (and for good this time, I promise you that) at the drop of a hat when you screw up next, but a chance is a chance. As I alluded to before, maybe if you play nice that hat might not be so eager to drop.

You seem to forget that this is not a privately hosted forum. If it was, then maybe you would get away with some of your "contributions". This is hosted for free by a forum service provider and you know that. It gets reviewed. If they come along and see you throwing all sorts of colorful language around and generally acting like a dickhead, they won't hesitate to delete us. Same reason why we can't have nudie pictures everywhere, or talk about pirating and/or emulating software.

We've said this before and we'll say it again- if you don't like it, leave. It's that simple.

This thread goes back on topic now, if you wish to discuss this further Moggo then I suggest you PM one of the Mods and we'll make you your own special thread in the Mod forum and share your thoughts there, then collectively reply to you via PM. Ignore this and post about it here and your post will be deleted without a second thought.

Did you need any further clarification on this, Mav? Same advice as Moggo- keep it to PM or don't post.

ok so i havent read ne of this so dont hurt me please...

now as i understand it there is alot of debate in indonesian law at the moment as to wether or not knowledge is a requisite component of posession. ie do you have to know it is there to be in posession of it? again, as i understand it, at the moment you do not have to have knowledge to be in posession of something. having said that i think she was lucky not to get life or the death sentance as i dont think there was any way under indonesian law that she could be innocent. i actually think it would be much easier for everyone involved if the media would leave it alone for a while untill it is all sorted out. despite all this i would like to think that if it was one indonesian lady 'smuggling' drugs into aus - given the same evidence - we would let her off, because in australia i dont think there is enough evidence to convict her.

Which is interesting because there was an amazingly similar case involving four Japanese tourists and they were deported a a couple of years ago after serving 10 and a half years. Can't be bothered finding a source, but it's been pretty widely reported across the media (One of the women who went to jail is still fighting her case!).

I sort of agree with Moggo, but don't really care enough to voice it.

:D