John Howard asks Bali appeals to Bali court in Schappelle Corby case

why are you advertising Bali holidays on your website. I am boycotting Indonesia until Schappelle is free.
I can’t take your concern seriously unless y ou do the same.

There has been much debate over the Schapelle Corby case in recent days. It has been argued by many legal experts that because possession is basically ten tenths of the law in Indonesia the outcome to Miss Corby’s trial was predictable and indeed a forgone conclusion. The fragile diplomatic relationship between Australia and Indonesia that the Howard government has tried so desperately to improve in recent years has also suffered greatly due to the outcome of the Corby trial and Prime Minister Howard has himself appealed for the Australian people to accept the results, remain calm during the appeal process and stressed the need to respect the laws of other nations. In reality, the debate over the moral issues and legalities surrounding the Schapelle Corby case can be settled quite simply. It is very easy for a rational and intelligent person to determine whether the Indonesian legal system is indeed a Just and Fair system presided over by fair and competent people and whether Indonesia should rightly be allowed to judge people of other nations who are detained in their country within their own legal system.
Firstly: consider the responses of the lead judged to two of the questions that he was asked immediately following the trial:
“Do you think you made the right decision?” To which he answered “Yes.”
“Do you think the Indonesian legal system is Just?” to which he again answered “Yes.”
By analyzing the answers to those two simple questions and by observing the outcome of other recent trials in Indonesia it is Sound and Logical to assume the reality of four very significant points:
1. It has been both Publicly and Legally Confirmed that under Indonesian Law, if a person is found guilty of using or being in possession of a drug that is legal in various countries and Provinces throughout the world and that has never been known to have killed anybody, (and if we put that in a time frame – Ever!) and another person is found guilty of helping blow up over 80 people in a building, then it is Right and Just for the former to receive a 20 years prison sentence and fine of 100,000,000 Rupia and the latter to receive a 2 year sentence and no fine of any kind.
2. It has been both Publicly and Legally Confirmed that under Indonesian Law, it is of Far Greater Consequence and does Far Greater Damage to the Nation and People of Indonesia to use or be in possession of a drug that will never kill you or anyone else, than it does to cause Violent Loss of Life to a great number of people, Gross Disfigurement to many others through injury and Enormous Property Damage by blowing up an occupied building.
3. It has been both Publicly and Legally Confirmed that under Indonesian Law, Violence and Acts of Terrorism are considered as Far Lesser Crimes and should receive Far Lighter Penalties than non-violent crimes. And therefore it is Sound, Logical and Reasonable to assume that:
4. According to Indonesian Law, Violence and Acts of Terrorism are considered to be Far Less Damaging to the Nation and People of Indonesia than acts of non-violence and It Is Right and Just that the penalty for non-violent crime should therefore be Far Greater than the penalty for violent crimes such as Rape, Murder or Terrorism resulting in Mass Murder, all of which should carry Minimum Sentences.
Due to recent Indonesian legal proceedings these 4 points can be seen as no less than Publicly Demonstrated and Legally Confirmed Facts of Indonesian Law.
Secondly: When the questions of arrest procedure and fingerprinting were raised and the Prosecution was accused of incompetence when dealing with the evidence not only was the judge unwilling to objectively consider the accusation but then proceeded to berate and threaten court action against the Defense for daring to accuse the office of the Public Prosecutor of incompetence. This action, done so very publicly, abundantly demonstrates that under Indonesian Law, when dealing with cases of possession of a banned substance:
1. Quite clearly the office of Judge is, in reality, no more than the Determining Arm of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and aptly shows that the only real role of the Judge in such a trial is to determine whether the sentence that has recommended by the Prosecutor is acceptable.
2. The statements and arguments put forth by the Prosecution are considered Always To Be Correct and the Defense is not permitted to question the validity of any these statements.
3. The question of any witnesses for the prosecution being wrong or mistaken is Not An Issue To Be Raised and that any attempt to raise the issue will result in Possible Court Action by the Judge Against the Defense. (How could this ever be considered legal, in even the most backward society?)
4. If the legal arguments, witness testimonies, corroborating evidence and personal rights of the Defendant are contrary or in any way opposed to the testimonies of the witnesses for the Prosecution then they will be considered to be Of No Relevance.
5. Corroborating evidence in any sworn testimony by any witnesses for the defense will be Dismissed As Hearsay unless they have direct knowledge of the actual guilty party and can produce said guilty party.
6. The possibility of innocence is of No Legal Consideration in crimes of a non-violent nature and even if reasonable doubt exists a Maximum Sentence should still be imposed.
7. Another set of Completely Opposing Rules applies for crimes of a Very Violent Nature in which case the accused should be given Every Help Possible and the most Minimum Sentence that can be made internationally acceptable should be imposed.
Unfortunately the presence of a defense lawyer in trials with such legal guidelines can serve no real purpose other than to extract money from the accused before incarceration. This is true because any statements made by the Defense of behalf of the accused are inconsequential and will be instantly dismissed as the verdict has already been predetermined by the simple act of the Police charging the accused with a crime. This fact has been made more than abundantly clear during the Corby trial.
The previous 11 points have been clearly demonstrated as solid and irrefutable facts of the Indonesian legal system both Publicly and Legally by simply observing the trial and outcome of the accused Bali bomber who killed over 80 people and the trial and outcome of the Schappelle Corby case.
The obvious question that begs to be asked is this:
Does the Indonesian Legal and Court System that is currently in place sound like it is:
(a) a legal system created by persons of sound mind that is Just and Fair, where innocence or guilt is determined by the court system? Or
(b) a legal system created by intellectual midgets of unsound mind with a insatiable need for dictatorship that biased and unfair where innocence or guilt is determined by arrest?
With a court system like that, one must really wonder whether Indonesia is even capable of conducting trials for its own citizens! Maybe the real question is: Why do they ever bother having a trial when the outcome has already been predetermined before it starts? It’s very hard not to feel a deep sympathy for the citizens forced to live under such ridiculous and obviously corrupt guidelines.

And one other relevant point that is slightly off the track desperately needs to be addressed:
Prime Minister Howard has pleaded for calm in this case and has stressed the need for Australians to respect the Laws of other nations. But Mr. Howard must realize that is difficult for an intelligent person to respect a legal system that has been publicly displayed to be so biased and grossly inadequate. And let us not forget that John Howard, in an act of flagrant disregard for International Law, willingly participated in the Iraq War. It is an indisputable fact that in doing so he broke no less than 3 rules of the ‘UN Charter’ [article 1(1), article 2(3), article 2(4)], and all 5 principles of the Charter of the ‘Nuremberg Military Tribunal’ which clearly states that preventative war is totally and unequivocally illegal and that to initiate war is not only a crime, it is ‘the supreme international crime’. It is obvious to all that America’s ‘War on Terror’ is no more than a thinly disguised excuse for America to invade any nation it feels like for whatever reason it can concoct and get people to believe. The plot is indeed so thinly disguised, it beggars belief that they could actually think the general population of the world is stupid enough to swallow it. It is abundantly clear that America has left the path of Nationhood and is now pursuing the path of Empire and very evident that Mr. Howard wishes Australia to be a part of that Empire. In making his decision to join forces with the war mongering, supremely vacuous and profoundly incompetent G.W. Bush in his ‘new pet war’, (done solely for oil), and agreeing to participate in what was no more than the blatant and aggressive invasion of another country, it is an undeniable fact that Mr. Howard participated in an act of war against another nation, committed a significant breach of International Law and his actions were totally and irrefutably illegal. And in doing so Mr. Howard has single-handedly caused Australia to lose the respect of many other nations and placed Australia and many Australians who live overseas in a significant amount of danger.
John Howard has become an international embarrassment to Australia who, due to his recent actions in Iraq, is now widely viewed around the world as an American puppet and topic of ridicule. He has done a great disservice to this country and his people and unfortunately Australians will now have to suffer the consequences of his actions, the repercussions of which will continue to be felt for a great many years to come. It’s doubtful in this particular case I admit, but Mr. Howard’s actions in Iraq may have even been a contributing factor in influencing the judges decision towards to Schappelle Corby. Indonesia is, after all, a Moslem country and unfortunately the new reality is that Australia needs to now expect this kind of attitude from many international courts and be prepared for the anger that many countries now feel and will be directing toward Australians, I could get very angry with Mr. Howard for the enormous trouble he has caused our country but then; One should never attribute to malice, that which can be adequately explained by stupidity…
So thank you Mr. Howard, but you asking the people of Australia to be calm and respect the laws of other nations really sounds like little more than a hollow statement of unbelievable Hypocrisy

I will never visit that country ever!

The justice system that gave a terrorist leader two years’ jail for his part in the Bali bombing yesterday sentenced Schapelle Corby to 20 years for smuggling cannabis.

Let them all live in poverty.

Mark Brown

Your all a bunch of fkn morons.

She got caught, now she is playing on your feelings “oh im so innocent, please let me go ”

And you fkn idiots are falling for it.

Rott in jail biatch!

My family will not vacation in Bali until a fair trial/appeal is held and all evidence is considered.

In Canada, we believe that a case should be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” and that all evidence should be preserved to support any criminal charges.

To convict someone without preserving evidence, whether in favour or against that person, is criminal in itself. Shame on the Bali people and its judicial system for allowing the assumption of a “guilty verdict” without a fair trial.

It is ridiculous that this woman or any other person should have to spend one minute in jail for marijuana. It is about time that people realize the struggle for legalization has been going on a long time all over the world. Cases like this are only examples of the dire need for lobbying and activism in your own countries. Jails should be filled with people who actually do HARM to others i.e. rapists, murderers, terrorists, people who cheat people out of their life savings, etc. Pot is about as harmless as having a couple beers but noone is outlawing alcohol. Cigarettes kill millions each year but corporations get big bucks to advertise them to the public. What about sex slave trade that goes on in most of these countries? Noone is talking about how children are being traded as sex slaves for large amounts of cash, where are the signs in the Bali airport that say if you murder, kill , or maim you will get the death penalty? When will people wake up and realize that you cannot stop people from smoking reefer or doing anything. All you can do is tolerate it and when the “forbidden fruit” is no longer forbidden, it will really stop most of the drug traffic anyway. Look at the Netherlands for example..it is tolerated and most Dutch people actually do not even participate in smoking pot. It is mostly the tourists who are drawn there because it is the only place they can indulge their vice without fear of being persecuted for it. And let’s be honest people, pot smoking isn’t like smoking crack or anything. It is akin to having a few beers after a hard day at work. I will pray for this woman and thousands like her around the world who are wrongly imprisoned and have their lives thrown away because they carry around an herb.

To the Don How many people in your hospital started with alcohol before drug use. I cannot imagine someone who has never done drugs to start with Herion or cocaine so to state that marijuana is a gateway is somewhat misleading.

The discussion here ranges from the lucid to the ludicrous!
To the barely literate contributors, the issue of her guilt or innocence can only be decided at a fair trial, which many informed people think did not happen. She did not get a fair trial because the evidence was not tested for origin, and was seriously contaminated from the moment of discovery. The police work was nothing short of “keystone cops”.
To the literate posters to this blog, and you know who you are, keep up the fight. Schappelle needs your support.

toney why argue wit you, you are the best west and always right you kinow it, damm muslins!

i agree

i think the brother put the drugs in the bag poor schappelle

poor
schappelle

poor schappelle

i think indonesia should send her back to Australia for a fair trial that she deserves. if she gets the death sentance that just makes the indonesian government murders. what seems worse to you in indonesia a drug trafficer or a murderer.