Murray

I've read articles like this 'So help me' before. If they are on a blog I always leave
a 'nice little wake-up call' for them - in the form of facts. These type of writers hate facts I have noticed.

I have read crap about the shape of Schapelle's eyes compared to her accusers eyes before. And I replied to that crap on another site only recently. And this Keelty-Hinch Theory as I call it - that the telegenic wins the public support... I am afraid life is a little deeper than that. As a now well known underwear model can attest.

So help me it's all about trust & truth.

And frankly this old bashing of Australian headlines doesn't do it for me. The media is the media. The editor with the snazziest most eye catching - emotionally stirring headline wins your attention. That is the name of the game for all media. Mind Share as it's known in advertising biz.

Well it got this womans attention didn't it? My advice to twits like her - just stick to the damn facts of the case. All adults with an IQ above 100 know what kind of games the media plays. And the Australian media have done plenty of damage to Schapelle also.

I truly believe there was a collective feeling amongst some of us, in our guts that told us Schapelle was innocent. I know I had it from reading her words and Roseleigh's words. Baggage handlers running drugs, I knew they were telling the truth. And after pouring through the facts and testimonies of others, I knew why I had trusted them at their word.

Regardless of race or looks, I was reading Corby stories and posting them on my page for some time before I found a photo to include. I had no idea what that innocent woman with the slightly unusual name looked like. This whole debate about her looks has really ****ed me off.

Even Schapelle herself has bought into it. Worried about how she looks because of the crap food and conditions - 'will people still like me and remember me?' I can't remember but it may have been Mercedes who related that to the media. It made me spew. I sent her a letter in which I mentioned we don't care about how you appear SC - it's your spirit we see.

If I got off the subject here I don't care. It's good to blow off steam.

BeeSting

Same here. And you know why? Quite frankly, I've met a female drug dealer - not a smuggler, but a dealer. She was just as young, pretty, feminine, well spoken, well dressed as Schapelle. (She was a blue eyed blonde too - even more "obviously" white than Schapelle.)

She got busted, and although I didn't exactly approve of her part-time occupation, I was shocked to hear by word of mouth - not from any media source - that she pled guilty and was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Of course, a 12 year sentence in Australia is really only something like 6-8 years, and possibly a lot less with good behaviour. But all the same, it seemed a little harsh. You hear of a great many murderers, rapists and child molesters who've gotten less and to the best of my knowledge, this girl was hardly a "big fish".

But the point is, I was never naive enough to base my opinion of Schapelle's guilt or innocence based on what she looked like. She can hardly help not being a tattooed Asian man - if the likes of Rosemary Mcleod actually cared about the latter type of drug accused, they'd be raising hell over them. Not constantly whining about Schapelle's looks being the sole reason that anybody cared about her.
Besides, the outcry over the execution of Van Nguyen in Singapore proved that the Australian public aren't that bad nor that shallow.

BeeSting

"Professor of Asian law" Tim Lindsey is at it again. It's one thing to defend Bashir's trial and sentence, but why does Lindsey feel the need to call the evidence in court of Corby's guilt "overwhelming" into the bargain?

Lindsey & Kingsley: Playing by the rules
Abu Bakar Bashir's release from jail does not mean Indonesia is soft on terrorism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 16, 2006
POLITICIANS and commentators around the world are rushing to express their horror at the release from an Indonesian jail of Abu Bakar Bashir, the spiritual leader of Jemaah Islamiah.
Bill Leak's cartoon on this page yesterday reflects popular Australian outrage that Schapelle Corby got 20 years for a bag of marijuana, while Bashir did only 30 months for the Bali bombing of October 2002. The common refrain is that Indonesia is soft on terror.

This is just not true. The Indonesian Government sees JI and other terrorist groups as enemies because they seek to overthrow the republic and create a new system based on their hardline interpretation of sharia. Since 2002, Indonesia law enforcement has detained more than 200 suspected terrorists, with many already tried and convicted. Has any country outside a war zone got a better record?

Among those in jail are the gang responsible for the first Bali attack, led by death-row inmates Imam Samudra, Muhklas and Amrozi. The notorious bomb-maker Azahari was killed in a shootout with police last year and his protege, Noordin Mohammed Top, is the target of a massive manhunt.

So, if Indonesia is so serious about stamping out terrorism, why was Bashir's stay in jail so short? The answer is tied to the democratic transition Indonesia has undergone since Suharto fell in 1998. Its often corrupt, incompetent courts are now under heavy scrutiny. Rule of law has become a popular mantra and judges can no longer simply lock up people the Government doesn't like, as was routine under Suharto. Evidence matters now.

Corby was jailed for 20 years because the evidence in court was overwhelming. By contrast, while few doubt Bashir's guilt, the evidence at his trials was extraordinarily flimsy.

Video link evidence from Singapore didn't comply with the rules, and the prosecution relied on witnesses who refused to testify or gave irrelevant evidence.

Evidence that Bashir was the titular head of JI didn't help – it is, unfortunately, still legal in Indonesia. Charges relating to the Marriott Hotel bombing were hampered by the fact that he was in jail at the time of the blast, and the anti-terror laws don't apply to the Bali attack. In the end, the courts seem to have convicted him of a vague criminal conspiracy largely on the basis of police reports alleging that, while in The Philippines, Bashir told Amrozi (who did not testify) that undertaking an event in Bali was up to him because he knew the situation in the field. Hardly a smoking gun.

As one of his lawyers said, Bashir could not be convicted on this untested evidence in a criminal trial in Australia or the US.

The prosecution's problems were compounded by the US withholding key witnesses, despite a demand from the court that they be produced. This did huge damage to the prosecution, so much so that the fact Bashir was jailed at all is a demonstration of how desperate the Indonesian judges were to put him away.

As to his release, there was little that authorities could do. Bashir served his time and got the usual remissions available to all other prisoners: 125 days in his case. It would surely be wrong to ask for anything else in an emerging rule-of-law system. Or perhaps the critics would prefer a return to the Suharto era, when enemies of the state could be locked up or even disappear with just a word from the top?

Tim Lindsey is and director of the Asian Law Centre at the University of Melbourne, where Jeremy Kingsley is a principal researcher.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...35-601,00.html

Dhadi

Tim Lindsey is a fool
And just a mouth piece for the Australian government.
He has no idea what really happens over here in Indonesia with regards to the law.

trez

While many of those articles MAY be extremely narrow minded, you can't deny people their opinions. Everyone has them, and you can't condemn someone for thinking something other than what you firmly believe.

aussiebloke

If I may fall back on the humour of my Ancestorial Comedians, "If the originator of this thread had brains of ink, they wouldn't have enough to write a full stop!"

terri65

firstly i believe shapelle is innocent.secondly i am related to kelly trueman. as you stated there has been little media attention on kelly. did you ever consider that the newspapers may have reported things wrong. i thought in this day you were innocent until proven guilty. kelly has not been found guilty and yet you say its obvious she is,you must have infomation no one else has. and by the way if you knew what she looked like you would know that kelly is as pretty as shapelle

BeeSting

... Although you PM'd me over this and I wrote back, should anyone in the future come across this thread, I should say it loud: you're absolutely right. I was totally out of line and in the wrong and I'm very sorry.

I was basing my opinion of Kelly Trueman from media reports that said she was guilty. Now when the exact same sort of media reports appear about Corby, I rant and rave over how unfair and unjust these are. I of all people should have known better than to do the same about your relative.

And I've been to Kelly Trueman's website and felt too appalled by what I read to know what to say that could possibly be of comfort or help to her or you. But I urge others to check out her site:
http://www.surefiredomains.com/kelly/
(And yes, Kelly is a beautiful girl. Those eyes!)

olive_lover

Dear Mr/ Mrs/ Ms Administrator

I have been reading your posts, comments, threads for a while and I could stay silent no longer. It appears you are an ardent supporter of Ms Corby which is great, I am too, but why don't you take a leaf out of her book of diplomacy.

I am all for people expressing their views, but why on earth must you swear and cuss all the time? It only demeans yourself and does not bode well for you. I must say I was very shocked to read the rules of your engagement on here, I am 100% behind her, but I would hope that I would not be dogmatic in my views and saying journalists have no idea, are crap and the like.

I have been pondering the deeper side of all this and I can only come up with one conclusion, that you are in fact the "red neck" you are accusing everyone else of being. Now don't get me wrong, I am not trying to have a go, far from it, I just want to understand all your anger and hostility.

Perhaps when you have calmed down a little you can post a reply to me, but no doubt too my words may fall on deaf ears. I half suspect it won't even get to a reply and you will be so incencessed you will block me, but ce la vie, I have said what I need to say. But if in fact you do do that, it says more about you than me. Because after all we are on the same side, I am just questioning your very overt and dogmatic ways.

Cheers.

And thanks for reading.

:)

PS - I am bracing myself for the inevitable personal attack which is bound to follow!

admin

No unfortunately we arent all on the same side olive_lover - nothing could be further from the truth. This very statement shows you have absolutely no idea what its like to run this site. DOnt worry tho I will tell you, Im just that sort of guy :)

For 2 years now people have been coming to this site saying the most nasty, disgusting and lowlife comments about Schapelle and to a lesser degree her family that you can imagine. I look upon Schapelle as a sister. If someone is suggesting that my sister deserves to spend 20 years in jail, she should suffer as much as possible, she should...(insert endless profanities here) then I react with all the verbal force I can muster. This site is for SUPPORTERS only. People come here to say nasty comments to Schapelle so I want to make sure they get their share of nasty comments back. I am sick of gutless little boys, not just on the net, but in society in general. If you want to make an offensive comment in public you need to be prepared for the consequences. At the inception of this forum I was spending 18 hours a day just moderating the forum. I put alot of time and effort into it and I never once expected anything whatsoever in return. Alot of jornalists do indeed have no clue whatsoever. For example I read on the 'Australian' website that I was a 'chicken farmer' I mean wtf where the heck did they pull that from!!!?!? Thats just one example. They are mere puppets to their respective networks and I have very little respect for the majority of them. How do you think Schapelle feels when we read all the insuations regarding her family. I fine example is the pot growers who came to Schapelle in prison, told her mother they were supporters and could they pose for a photo. Next thing we have yet another scandel surrounding this. There is the garbage about her and ron bakir, there is the rot about her having an affair with an Indonesian guy - whilst in prison ffs!!!
I hardly accuse everyone of being a redneck now do I. That statement in itself is ridicolous and we all know it. I and the other supporters are NOT interested in hearing from ********s - at least noone as said to me 'oh please admin leave all the offensive comments on the site they really add to it!!" I heap praise on anyone and everyone who is supporting Schapelle. You say you just want to understand my anger well I say you are just looking for attention.

The bottom line is this is my site and if you like it stay if you dont there is the virtual door - points over there somewhere.