Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Indonesian prosecutors reject Schapelle Corby's appeal

Indonesian prosecutors rejecting Schapelle Corby's last ditch appeal say there was no need for police to fingerprint the bodyboard bag in which she's alleged to have concealed 4.1kg of marijuana.
"There was no need for fingerprinting because the evidence was inside the convict's bag," said prosecutor Suhadi, in his written rejection of Corby's bid to overturn her 20-year sentence for drug smuggling.
Corby last month applied to Indonesia's Supreme Court for a judicial review of her case - the last chance court appeal before she pleads for clemency.
She insists the marijuana found in her bodyboard bag at Denpasar airport in October 2004 was planted by members of a drug ring operating at Australian airports.
One plank of her final appeal was that as police had not checked for fingerprints on the plastic bag containing the marijuana, prosecutors had failed to prove she was a drug smuggler.
But Suhadi, in his response to the Corby appeal filed with the Denpasar District Court, rejected the argument.
"That is not an argument but a mere conclusion by the appealer because the appealer has no evidence to show that the bodyboard bag with marijuana in it is not hers."
Suhadi also said Corby's lawyers had argued that importation could only occur if organised and conducted by a high-scale drugs business network.
"Narcotics importation is by nature forbidden, whether it is in big amount or small amount, it is the same thing," he said.
Hopes by Corby's lawyers that airport closed circuit TV footage might clear their client were dashed during the appeal hearings.
A letter from Justice Minister Chris Ellison said there was no CCTV footage from Sydney airport to back claims the marijuana had been planted.
The arguments by Corby's lawyers, and prosecutors' counter-arguments, will be sent to the Supreme Court in Jakarta, which will rule whether there is enough reason to reopen her case.
© 2006
AAP

GOBLOK!!!! No need to fingerprint the bodyboard bag?? What if prints on the boardbag matched prints on the marijuana bag? What if her prints are not on the marijuana bag but other prints are? How stupid are these prosecutors and police? This is basic common sense and police procedure. It's obvious they have decided the case is closed because the police and prosecutors mishandled the case and that they would be embarrassed if they were proven to have had incorrectly convicted her. Rather than have justice properly served, police and prosecutor's egos prevail and the truth and logic don't. The Supreme Court has only one choice and that is to re-open the case and admit all evidence. Then and only then will justice properly be served.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home