< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: Mangled Thoughts on the Corby case


SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Monday, May 30, 2005

Mangled Thoughts on the Corby case

Mangled Thoughts has a very in depth examination of the Corby marijuana case, assigning blame for her conviction on her defense lawyers.
...what was the objective of the prosecution, and what was the objective of the defence?

The prosecution had to tie the bag of marijuana to Corby, demonstrate that marijuana was her possession.

The defence had to establish to the contrary, showing either the evidence the prosecution laid out before the Judges did not tie that bag to Corby or, lay out evidence which shows, while the prosecution’s evidence might have satisfied the charges against Corby, in fact it Corby was innocent, that it was not hers that, as their claim was planted by some-one else.
Mangled Thoughts: The mistakes made in Corby’s case were made by her lawyers.

Posted by Antarctic Lemur | 5/30/2005 09:05:00 pm


Blogger Roger said...

I have not been paying too much attention to this case but I have heard a few things that disturbed me. I heard on the news that the Judge presiding over her case has never aquited anyone (in a drugs case?) in over 500 trials. Sounds fair to me - NOT.
And that they disallowed much of the defence's evidence. Is that true? What kind of a stacked deck are they running over there anyway? Boycott Indonesia, I say.

5/30/2005 10:00:00 pm  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Still if someone turned up at a New Zealand airport with such an amount of marijuana in their luggage and no real evidence pointing to someone else as the culprit, they would be screwed as well.

5/30/2005 10:04:00 pm  
Blogger Roger said...

Quite right, but they wouldn't get 20 years, and you would be hard pressed to find a New Zealand judge with a similar record to the one in the Corby case. Not having let anyone off in 500 cases is absurd. There is no way that not one of the people in one of those cases was innocent.

5/31/2005 10:33:00 am  
Blogger gazzadelsud said...

but who cares Roger. If you smuggle drugs into NZ you get tried under NZ law. If you smuggle to indonesia you get tried under indonesian law. Indonesia law is very clear and there is not excuse for not knowing - its plastered all over the place. Sounds like a fair cop to me, all the alternatives are highly implausible.

5/31/2005 11:35:00 am  
Blogger Roger said...

Who cares? People all over the world who want and respect a fair and independent judicial system, that's who. 500 cases and not one acquital. There is something wrong that that, isn't it obvious?
As for being plastered all over the case, it should be. There should be signs saying "Our judges never let anyone off - be warned".

5/31/2005 12:42:00 pm  
Blogger Lucyna said...

Well, I won't be visiting Indonesia anytime soon. Might also get some industrial strength locks for my suitcases when I travel again, just in case.

5/31/2005 01:13:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home