This is Schapelle Corby related news. However, the main subject of this little post is Robin Tampoe; a one-time lawyer for Schapelle Corby.
Robin Tampoe (photo courtesy of here) became involved in the Corby case very early on. He provided pretty bad advice, in my opinion, because his own ego required that he piggy back on this case in order to make a name for himself by using someone else's legal predicament to further his career. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, this has backfired in a big way and has in fact ended his legal career as he has been struck off the role of legal practitioners.
The advice was indicative of someone not knowing the intricacies of the Indonesian legal system and also highlighted a substantial lack of understanding of the substantive law that applies in Indonesia. In this sense, the writing was on the wall for Corby as soon as Tampoe became involved. However, the advice is not the reason for his striking off, but rather his conduct as a lawyer and handling of client information.
It was certainly a Forrest Gump kind of a moment in the type "stupid is as stupid does". Simply, Tampoe came into possession of confidential information which he then divulged to the world on TV. This information related to prior criminal convictions among members of the family. After being dumped from the Corby legal team he then went on to add insult to injury by disparaging them in the documentary, "Schapelle Corby - The Hidden Truth", by calling the family "trash".
The Legal Services Commissioner initiated the action based on an allegation that Tampoe breached client confidentiality. In essence, he failed to uphold the lawyer - client privilege that certain communications are subject to. In a written judgment of Justice Roslyn Atkinson of the Queensland Legal Practice Tribunal, Tampoe was found guilty of professional misconduct. Atkinson then ordered that Tampoe be struck off the roll.
On a side note. It is interesting to see that in the current Manohara case two of Indonesia's senior lawyers, Todung Mulya Lubis and OC Kaligis, have left the legal teams of Prince Tengku Temenggong Mohammad Fakhry and Manohara Odelia Pinot respectively, and then gone on to make some disparaging remarks about their former clients relating to their respective intents to resolve that matter. I wonder, any ethics or professional misconduct issues there?
919 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 919 Newer› Newest»Rob...
One question. While in that disgusting country did you make a stand against the death penalty?
Gaile,
It was Mercedes on the show raising money for FPSS to help fund and free Schapelle... How could Schapelle be on it? You said you think not. Why?
Sorry about that.
Yes excellent idea for Mercedes to be on Dancing with the Stars. I doubt that Mercedes would donate to FPSS. For one reason I think that Mercedes would want to give to a charitable organisation. For example, an organisation that Schapelle (and Mercedes) would support like conservation of whales and dolphins. It would be up to them. But any monies that Mercedes would attain would not in my opinion go to FPSS. In fact I don’t even know if they are a charitable organisation. I doubt it.
WCDS for example. When I 'adopted a dolphin' for Schapelle last year Mercedes told me how much time she and Schapelle had spent at Seaworld on the Gold Coast. I am sure that WDCS would be (one of) a chosen charity or organisation.
Gaile...
I gathered that from your posts that you will not rest until you see Schapelle home. I do hope you enjoy success and I do hope Schapelle gets to breathe the air of freedom once again.
Rob
On that point you are absolutely correct. I want Schapelle to use her body board again on the Gold Coast of Australia - free.
This is very interesting. If a trial had happened in Australia, there would have been a jury? Yes? Correct.
In Schapelle’s case it was only a ‘judge ’ who had sentenced 500 people. Correct? Not one prior of innocence. Not one. This beggars belief. No person of normal intelligence could believe this. Corruption is rife in Indonesia in the judicial area. So now I am expected to believe that the 3 judges are not in any way shape or form corruptible? Give me a break.
It is well documented that one of the judges was ‘reading a book’ during the proceedings. Bored. The outcome had already been decided.
Rob, you agreed that it is highly unlikely that journalists 100% agree with Schapelle’s condition. Then how do you explain that the judges (LS) can give 500 verdicts of guilty? The laws of average simply do not correlate.
Interesting Rob. I was just checking out some previous stuff on your blog. Re Schapelle. Is this the Lubis who was with Schapelle? Only name I can relate to is Lubis - not the other names.
On a side note. It is interesting to see that in the current Manohara case two of Indonesia's senior lawyers, Todung Mulya Lubis and OC Kaligis, have left the legal teams of Prince Tengku Temenggong Mohammad Fakhry and Manohara Odelia Pinot respectively, and then gone on to make some disparaging remarks about their former clients relating to their respective intents to resolve that matter. I wonder, any ethics or professional misconduct issues there?
Rob, I believe you asked earlier about documentation for Judge Sirait's perfect record (500-0) in drug cases. Here is a link about that from two days before verdict day which also contains an interesting quote:
"But Justice Minister Chris Ellison says the government will negotiate a one-off interim agreement to get Corby home if negotiations for the prisoner transfer scheme get bogged down."
Apparently at the time the Aus. authorities thought a special deal for Schapelle was possible, and this was both after her case became a media circus and before her current illness provided an additional reason. THere is no reason they cannot make a special deal now, whether behind the scenes or not, and I agree with Gaile that if you lose her over there most of Australia will wish they had.
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/news_world_story_skin/567953?format=html
RE:'Dancing with the Stars' idea: Foreign Prisoner Support Service would respectfully decline the offer.
Kay Danes
Advocate
Foreign Prisoner Support Services
Gaile,
Do you know what is the application process for Mercedes to go on Dancing with the Stars?
Don't care what charity Mercedes would choose. Curious to know why FPSS would reject an offer. It would only bring them (or any charity) more money and support...
Desert Rat:
I know from my dealings with various members in Government, both current and previous, that there was a slight window of opportunity for a diplomatic intervention. The planning was underway. But the approach was completely derailed and as a result, that window is now firmly closed.
Kay Danes
Advocate
Foreign Prisoner Support Service
Am I a psychiastrist? Close, Rob, but no cigar.
I am a professional in the field of criminology within a discipline involving psychological profiling. As a background observer I have investigated this case to the current date much more deeply than you have, including those parties involved in the periphery.
My conclusions, which are supported by facts which you have simply not identified are :-
Schapelle Corby is wholly innocent
There is a political dimension within Australia, embracing complicity and corruption, of which you appear to be completely ignorant. Yet this has driven the current situation to the point at which Schapelle Corby's life is in grave danger.
Foreign prisoner repatriation is a market, driving all the inevitable motives and agendas you would expect when financial revenue is involved.
If you have a genuine interest in the case you will work backwards from those facts. You will investigate properly rather than superficially. You will learn why Schapelle Corby's innocence is actually moot to this day despite others attempting to brush it under the carpet. You will subsequently see why you are being played like a piano by those whose agenda is far wider than Schapelle Corby's welfare and her accute need for repatriation.
You will cease blaming the lesser evil of the incompetence of Schapelle Corby's defense team, and begin to recognize the greater evil of the complex and systemic corruption within the Indonesian judicial system, fostered by a background of demonstrable political corruption in both countries. You will cease to comment upon matters upon which you have only a superficial understanding, and instead invest the necessary effort to familiarize yourself with the actual dynamics behind the case and behind Schapelle Corby's continued incarceration.
Unfortunately, you do not appear to be motivated to do any of this. You have framed a position, based upon a tiny subset of the data, and you are content in the comfort zone you have created for yourself, despite the glaring inconsistencies you recognize even regarding the posts on this blog, but have turned a blind eye to.
Based upon this accurate assessment, I am glad that I am not a client of yours. I do hope though that you do more homework on behalf of your clients than you have done on this particular case. Until you do that, mate, as a professional, perhaps you should refrain from making comments damning an innocent person whose suffering has extended well beyond the level which shames two nations.
Larry Ho
I'm not sure who suggested "Dancing With the Stars" (the poster is anonymous), but I don't think it would go down well with the public, especially when trying to get Schapelle's illness taken seriously.
Gaile, as for what and how to help Schapelle, I would go with a campaign involving the wider public - those who believe she should come home. Maybe an ad in the paper asking them to write to the PM or visit a site for more info. The problem is, a lot of the people in that demographic may not believe in her innocence. I can't see supporters being accepting towards them.
Larry, I'm curious about the "wider agenda" you mentioned. What agenda?
Hi Larry,
I'm very interested in hearing more on what you have said here.
Larry said: "Foreign prisoner repatriation is a market, driving all the inevitable motives and agendas you would expect when financial revenue is involved."
Would you be able to give a breakdown on the actual economics to your findings? I'm assuming that you must have done extensive research on this? This topic is fascinating. I and my colleagues have done some research on the economics relating to foreign internment as opposed to national internment and costs to taxpayers and respective governments.
I'm also hoping you will clarify what you mean by 'inevitable motives and agendas'.
A very interesting point for discussion.
Thank you,
Kay Danes
Advocate
Foreign Prisoner Support Services
Jacqui wrote:
I'm not sure who suggested "Dancing With the Stars", but I don't think it would go down well with the public, especially when trying to get Schapelle's illness taken seriously.
You have a good point. But you're so concerned about the public, which I don't understand. How bout the same approach as the Ralph magazine. Schapelle REALLY wanted her sister to do this. How bout Schapelle decide if she would like her big sister on TV showing that she's doing everything she can for Schapelle. Gerard Goosens was an excellent example as Mercedes predeccesor... Besides, some of us here think Mercedes would be a great dancer!!
Jacqui wrote:
The problem is, a lot of the people in that demographic may not believe in her innocence. I can't see supporters being accepting towards them.
You sound like a very conditional supporter to me. Yes, I believe Schapelle is innocent but I would be equally supportive even if I didn't... A true supporter is not doing it because of their feelings towards this. I guess the unconditional ones are a league up from the judgemental ones....
Jacqui...
I have not been online must of the day. So, I am only getting a chance to read and reply to comments now.
I am taking a bit of a personal character bashing it seems today. But, I will get to those comments in due course.
The point of the original blog post was about Robin Tampoe and him being struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners.
However, there is a link between the man and Schapelle so I was not too worried about the odd Schapelle comment here are there, but would have figured these comments to be better placed on one of the posts that dealt with Schapelle in a more direct manner.
After 215 comments I am certain of this. I also see that this particular blog post has made the Schapelle forum and there are plenty of concerns about the value of commenting here on this thread. I might address those too at some point.
All I have been saying all along is that my personal opinion, with personal being the key word, is that the more inclusive the movement for Schapelle the more likely it is to succeed.
I do not think a PTA is the option. The negotiations might have been restarted but seem likely to be of little benefit in the short term.
But there are those who insist that there is a mutually beneficial conspiracy between the Indonesian and Australian governments that makes many of these arguments, if not all, moot.
I am thinking that after I respond to the current comments, that I pull the plug. People can comment if they want, but I will only read them and not respond. I seem to be covering the same ground over and over again.
Hope you are enjoying your weekend.
Anonymous...
As I said, out your name or a pen name to your comment and I might respond. You want to attack me personally then have the courage of your convictions.
I note that Larry Ho has the courage of his convictions to call me out. Are you Larry Ho and just forgot to add your name at the end?
Anonymous...
Dancing with the Stars would certainly be a very visible means of getting Schapelle's name and needs back into the press.
However, if there is a widespread media and political conspiracy to thwart efforts in support of Schapelle I wonder whether the powers that be would entertain the possibility.
Gaile...
Judging by some of the comments that follow this one, perhaps Schapelle's fate was sealed even before she said she was "not guilty".
I notice this post has found its way onto one of the forums and there are some concerns raised over there. Should I address them here and there or just here or just there?
I would be interested in seeing where the animosity stems from between Schapelle's supporters and the FPSS (aside from questions about its status as a non-profit or for profit organization).
Anonymous...
I am guessing you are the anonymous that posted before about me being a crummy person or something.
Yes, I did. I fail to see why this is important to you or this particular discussion thread?
Gaile...
Do you believe it is a possibility?
Dolphins and whales are good causes.
I am guessing a different boogie board, but yes, that would be nice to see, if for no other reason than it would mean she has survived her ordeal.
Gaile...
In Australia, yes it could have been a jury trial. The defense might also have sort a judge-alone trial if they believed that the issues were of such a technical nature that a jury might be confused by the technicalities (but it might be better for you to ask Larry Ho about these things).
Yes, I read the article where Linton Sirait is boasting of having heard 500 drug-related trials and not acquitting a solitary defendant. As I said, I am looking into this, but it is going to take some time. Not all cases or decisions are reported. This means that there needs to be a trawling of court records to cross-reference judge lists with decisions, and then determining Linton Sirait's record on convictions (once again Larry Ho might be a valuable source of information on this as he has done extensive research).
I do not think that I have disagreed with the possibilities you raised. However, even if the law of averages would not support the idea that everyone of them is guilty (maybe they all plead guilty), then perhaps it is other verdicts that were flawed and Schapelles' was not, using the law of averages.
ON TML and OC Kaligis, I raise the issue of whether the remarks breached the code of ethics for Indonesian advocates on the posts relevant to that matter.
Desert Rat...
Thanks for the link. I had seen and read it before.
The 500 cases are in Linton Sirait's words. I am trying to track down exact numbers of cases but this could be a relatively long process considering the state of (or lack of) digitalization of records. Simply, there are lots of manual yards to be hoed on this one.
I believe that at a point in time there was a chance. Maybe it can be revived, but the last I heard on this was that the window of opportunity that was, is no more.
Kay...
I am sensing animosity here between FPSS and the supporters of Schapelle.
I guess this is one of the things that Larry was talking about when he profiled me, when he said I needed to dig deeper to enhance my superficial knowledge.
Care to elaborate? So, that those equally ill-informed like myself can become significantly more informed.
Rob,
Overall there is no animosity between the bulk of mainstream Schapelle supporters and FPSS.
FPSS has an excellent relationship with the Schapelle Support & Lobby Network (which is a separate entity to the Supporter Forum) and has done for several years in fact. We direct all support that comes through our website to the administrator of the Support and Lobby Network. Their numbers are quite strong and they allow open dialogue and freedom of thought. Latest count of their membership is around 700 legitimately registered members. We also contribute to the monthly newsletter at the request of the Administrator of the Schapelle Support & Lobby Network. We are often called on them for advice on preparing letters to Government etc...
FPSS has been helping prisoners and their families since 1995 when it was first established as an online volunteer web service by Mr. Tony Fox. It is simply a free service to connect families and prisoners to support.
The posts here by one or two forum members does not reflect the mainstream views of Schapelle Supporters, who understand our role and function.
Regards,
Kay Danes
Advocate FPSS
You sound like a very conditional supporter to me. Yes, I believe Schapelle is innocent but I would be equally supportive even if I didn't...
Sorry, I think my post has been misinterpreted. I don't personally have a problem with people supporting Schapelle if they don't believe she is innocent, but judging by some comments it seems other supporters have a problem and that would make it difficult to pull off the campaign suggested.
Larry Ho...
Mate, all classic strategies to confuse readers without saying very much at all.
Mate, considering the extensive research you have done on this you must have some papers you have presented or some work that can be read by the ill-informed like me.
I also would have thought that seeing you have done all the research you could do a little more on the "education" of Rob Baiton front by providing some sources, you know a little more direction.
The facts? Which facts? Whose facts? I cannot address the facts that support your conclusions because you do not state them.
Can you, or care, to elaborate on the political dimension to which you refer? Specifically, how this puts Schapelle Corby's life in danger.
If there is a political dimension then you must be basing it on some sort of empirical evidence, right? Or is it just a preponderance of circumstantial anecdotal experience?
I would also be interested in the economics of the market for Foreign Prisoner Exchange. Your statement sounds authoritative which suggests you have either done the research yourself or would be able to cite a source for me to pursue in the pursuit of my self-education on this matter. I would appreciate the assistance.
Larry, mate, I don't think you will find that I have said that there is not complex or systematic corruption in the Indonesian judicial system. However, this in and of itself does not explain the Corby verdict nor her continued incarceration. So, assistance as to the sources you are using for your "facts" would help.
If I have made a grave error, then I am more than prepared to admit it, in writing, but I am unaware of the "facts" to which you refer or the evidence that proves the particular facts to which you are referring.
When I ask you, genuinely I might add, you blow me off with, "superficial knowledge" and "do the research". Both of which you claim that you can remedy but fail to do so.
Because I do not flip sides and fall into line behind you and the others that have posted here is hardly turning a blind eye.
Still too cryptic, but I am interested in the far-wider agenda.
Larry, I am hardly offended with respect to the statement about you being glad that you are not a client of mine. The "accurate assessment" claim is interesting. Seeing we have never met, but to each their own.
It is amusing that you are telling me what I can and cannot comment on. While we are at it, why don't you point me to something that I can read written by you as Larry Ho. Or state where it is that you get all these professional qualifications from, or what cases you have worked on in the past that supports your claims to expertise.
In an Australian court of law, at least in my understanding, an "Expert" would be require to prove that they had the requisite expertise before that testimony could be heard.
Have a nice weekend.
Is your interest professional or personal?
Jacqui...
On the Dancing with Stars front, it might be something worth exploring.
Kay...
I am looking forward to whether Larry Ho breaks down the research for me, because I am genuinely interested.
I have looked around but I am not sure I am finding the evidence and facts to which he refers.
I have always thought the idea of "educating" others was to share what you know. However, I guess this is not the case for all.
Anonymous...
Adopt a pen name so I can be sure that you are same commenter to several of the previous anonymous commenters.
Conditional supporter and true supporter sounds a lot like me to the idea of being a conditional follower of a religion and a true follower of a religion. Aren't we all supporters no matter what guise we come in?
Hi Rob
Likewise, I am genuinely interested in these figures, particularly given my work in this area.
I also think there is another element to these discussions and that is based on the fact that these issues (international affairs/relations) are often difficult for those to understand, who don't work in this environment. As you know, there are numerous complexities dealing with foreign governments, judiciary, authorities etc... and add to the mix the bilateral relations, trade agreements, national security elements. Also, I usually find that some get confused because of a lack of cultural awareness. Australians quite often make too many comparisons between differing foreign judicial processes because they are unfamiliar with the system of governance in foreign States, and try to apply western logic based on western processes when the reality is that the two are vastly different. (ie: reasonable doubt, jury conclusions, justice and miscarriages of justice etc...)
I personally think Indonesia faces incredible challenges particularly as a jurisdiction where regional stability and security are constantly tested.
People interested in the plight of prisoners detained overseas should learn all they can on the subject to improve their credibility and capabilities as 'supporters'. Then support movements could grow effectively.
The David Hicks campaign is a good example because we had experts (real ones) driving the campaign and the supporters took their lead from the advice given from those experts. Hence it all turned out well. Many lessons to be learned here if one has an open mind.
Hmmm - i think your dollar would do far more good work donating to the FPSS than to some of the other trailer trash outfits I have been witness to. Many of the comments here seem to be about slagging people off, not helping anyone at all. While some of you people are massaging each others ego's and playing tit for tat perhaps you should spare a thought for those hard working people who spend their time and resources actually helping people incarcerated in foreign prisons. Shapelle is but one - there are many thousands who need help, and only a few good hearted souls who actually measure up to the task! I thought for a min about calling Mercedies publicist, but then I thought again, and after reading this rather one eyed blog I think I will go and lend my assistance to someone else who really needs it. It would seem that Schapelle has more than enough people helping her already, and while it is good that these people can find meaning in their own lives by helping Schapelle, one must really ask, how much is she being helped by the carry on witnessed in this blog!
Rev Mick
The individual who is using multiple pseudonyms and posing as other people (ie stealing their identity) has been reported to the police, as has the Schapelle supporters forum for the discussion of illegal activity.
Rob, I think DWTS wouldn't be such a bad idea after Schapelle comes home, but the public has just been told that Schapelle's condition is very dire and is to be taken seriously. Public support is important. Seeing her sister on DWTS would send mixed messages, having everyone scratching their heads thinking, "Hang on, why is she doing that when...?". That's just how I see it.
As for Ralph, I thought it gave Mercedes the opportunity to have her say when the rest of the media seemed pretty hostile. There was a bit of a backlash, though.
Rev. Mick...
One-eyed blog? Really? How many posts have you read?
This is not a Schapelle Corby blog. The subject matter and the views express are quite varied.
Admittedly, this particular post has attracted a good number of people who are passionate supporters of Schapelle Corby. But, that hardly makes it one-eyed.
Nevertheless, to each their own with respect to opinions and you are entitled to express yours here.
Have a nice weekend. And, may whoever you choose to support may they soon be free.
Kay...
I am learning much as I go through this process. To be honest, I never thought that this post would attract quite so much attention.
There are several people pondering whether the post or I deserve so much attention. My answer to them would be, probably not.
It is a little weird in that I never claimed to be an authority on Schapelle or the case outside a very narrow corridor. However, this has not stopped personal attacks on my character and integrity. I am thick-skinned enough that it is water off a duck's back, but it is flattering that I am being attacked in this way.
So, yes, perhaps with a little effort we can all learn something new.
Anonymous...
So, I should be expecting a raid from the police to secure my desktop as they seek to uncover who is posing as who?
Maybe they, the police, could also reveal to me who you are seeing you have made questionable comments and inferences about my character and integrity...
Jacqui...
There would probably be a little bit of both ways if it ever happens. Yes, Schapelle is suffering under the strains of mental illness, but the public exposure of the illness and its seriousness might be of greater benefit than harm.
I guess this would depend on how it was done.
I find the idea being pushed by some that Indonesia takes no interest in what is being written and spoken of in Australia with regard to the case a little naive.
I am not suggesting that the powers that be in Indonesia are reading my blog and making policy decisions on what they read here. I am suggesting that there is a good chance the the Embassy and Consulates are taking notes generally about the "lay" of the land so to speak.
But, if others believe that the Indonesians don't give the proverbial rat's arse, then so be it.
Rob, this has nothing to do with your blog, but to do with the individuals who have posted on here. The message is for them.
True, Rob... I just think that there must be a better program for it than DWTS...
I have provided some broad direction Rob in case you are genuinely interested in serious research. It is your decision alone whether you wish to embark upon this.
I don't intend to do it for you, as self discovery will bear more weight in terms of enlightenment with regard to the facts.
I do note that despite your claim to the contrary the tone of your words do indicate that a degree of hostility creeping in, mate. That is a pity, as the implication is that you will continue to make wholly false statements regarding these matters.
Note too that I post under my name, Larry Ho. Unlike some of those agreeing with you I do not post under additional identities.
Kay Danes, I do not intend to discuss this with you, as I suspect that you understand my words regarding the market more clearly than your post suggests. I would also add that your relationship with those closest to Schapelle Corby's family is not good at all, contrary to the impression your comments create. I have done my homework on this matter too Ms Danes.
To end my involvement, I return to you Larry, to re-enforce the need for research time investment. Your comments re-confirm the mere scratches you have made to the surface of this case, from the nature of the 'show trial' with its corrupt political backdrop, to the economies of the prisoner transfer market.
As a professional you should be wary of making certain comments, for example those proclaiming guilt, without having examined sufficient facts of the case and its wider context. That examination requires significant effort and commitment.
The reward of that effort would be clarity with respect to both the case, and the agendas of some of those posting here, to which you are currently completely oblivious.
For my part, I have merely attempted to guide you on the path to a clearer understanding.
Good luck. And of course we can only hope that Schapelle Corby is returned to a hospital in Australia soon, before it is too late.
Larry Ho
Jacqui...
Maybe. But it is just a suggestion at this point in time, isn't it?
Who is to say that Mercedes (as the dancer to be) or Schapelle or any of her extended family support network would agree.
I do not know the Corby family, so cannot rightly say.
Talk about transparent! I thought you genuinely had something to contribute. It wasn't a trick question.
Again, you twist words to suit what your own mind can handle/process.
I said that FPSS has an excellent relationship with the Schapelle Support and Lobby Network. I said nothing of my relationship with the Corbys. In fact, I don't have a relationship with them. I have not claimed to have one either. That's your words not mine and I'm sure that all her supporters wouldn't lay claim to having a relationship with her or her family either, when after all, they are merely supporters.
Kay Danes
Advocate FPSS
Larry Ho...
Are you for real?
If you are an educator you might need to do a little work on the methods. In any event, this is hardly about education. You are making assertions about facts that you do not care to present.
Is it just a simple case that you do not have the facts that you claim to? What you have written and your response to my questions resembles white noise, and therefore only those with very special abilities (or equipment) will be able to decipher it.
You have not provided broad direction, rather you have provided no direction outside of a few generalizations. These generalizations are indicative of little "real" knowledge of "real" facts.
Maybe I can find the evidence in the next issue of a conspiracy magazine?
Mate, if you have real facts and knowledge of this case then you would have an obligation to provide them. The facts you say you have are seemingly critical to the success of any movement to see Schapelle Corby released into proper medical care.
Seems like you are not who you claim to be, at least to my uneducated mind.
As to real identities and aliases. Can you prove to me you are Larry Ho? Is there something that I can look at that might prove your identity.
That's what I thought.
I am being played like a piano by a bloke with probably a multitude of aliases. It does not matter who you are in real life because your posts as Larry Ho reveal that you are not a profiler of any repute.
Have a nice weekend Mr. Larry Ho.
Kay...
It would seem that there is to be a little more mutual ego stroking!
The offering up of the evidence would so seal the deal on this one.
So, my question is, "why not do it, ante up the evidence?"
And, then Larry Ho, you'd be the man!
I tried to help you Rob mate, but I have obviously offended you instead. That is a pity.
I am simply urging you to do your own homework. It isn't hard to discover the real facts regarding the case, and those posting above.
Goodbye.
Larry Ho
Larry...
You need to help yourself before you can help others!
You have come on here posing as a profiler of some sort, making assessments of all kinds, and alluding to "facts", but to date you have not provided any evidence to support any of your assertions.
To the contrary, when pressed to provide data and information you turn tale and run.
Mate, if what you say is true, then you could be an import source of information to all those out there who want to support Schapelle before it is too late but are wavering because they do not have the information and data that you have.
You really are doing a disservice to yourself and to Schapelle's supporters, and potential supporters of Schapelle.
Perhaps you can see it in your heart to enlighten us with your knowledge so that we all can be aware and we can all make informed decisions about how we want to participate.
Right now, as it stands, you have made some interesting points but have not managed to close the deal. It is sort of like getting to first base, but then getting thrown out trying to steal second. Simply, you're in the game but on the bench.
You're right on the discovering of who certain commenters are. I believe that an anonymous commenter posted this link:
http://www.derkeiler.com/Newsgroups/comp.security.misc/2002-03/0683.html
Have a nice day, Larry!
There aren’t many Corby supporters who hold animosity toward FPSS.
FPSS member Kay Danes experienced very similar psychological symptoms during her incarceration in Laos to what Schapelle is currently suffering in Bali. Kay recently wrote about this on the FPSS website.
2 quotes -
>>> During the latter part of our detainment, I began experiencing ‘depression with psychotic symptoms’. There were occasions that I convinced myself that I heard voices of dead people whispering in my ear, and at other times, that my own shadow was working with the secret police to manipulate me into signing a false statement against our client. It was all rather bizarre and a little frightening which prompted the Australian Embassy doctor to prescribe me anti-depressants. Despite the fact that I had strong support from my government and their belief that we were innocent pawns in a political power play, I still found the conditions of the prison often intolerable. >>>
And one more quote from the same article;
>>> Ideally, given that she (Schapelle) is a foreigner, though not suggesting any preferential treatment should be given as such, it is obvious that she is struggling with cultural and language difficulties which, in turn, hinder her ability to cope with foreign internment. This, coupled with the fact that those around her are, perhaps, unwittingly compounding the situation by constantly building false hopes for imminent release, then under such extenuating circumstances, consideration should be given to her being repatriated to an Australian Justice health facility where she can receive care in a familiar but secure environment without the associated challenges as described. >>>
The full article can be found here;
http://www.foreignprisoners.com/
FPSS would like to see Schapelle Corby repatriated back to Australia for treatment and are not shy about saying so. As a Corby supporter I have personally spent months discussing workable and appropriate strategies with Kay Danes on how we might achieve this. Kay, FPSS, and their contacts have been instrumental in bringing 12 prisoners back to their home countries in the last 5 years, many with cases more complex than Schapelle’s.
I personally know many Corby supporters who wish the same diplomatic strategies and experts would be allowed to work on Schapelle’s behalf too.
No one makes a cent from bringing a prisoner home, Kay’s husband will laugh his head off when he hears this!
Murray.....
Demonstrate the truth or existence of your claim (something) by way of evidence that FPSS, and their contacts have been instrumental in bringing 12 prisoners back to their home countries in the last 5 year.
Name some of these prisoners who are so indebted to FPSS ??
Murray...
Help me understand why? FPSS's diplomatic strategies and experts are not being allowed to work on Schapelle’s behalf.
(I personally know many Corby supporters who wish the same diplomatic strategies and experts would be allowed to work on Schapelle’s behalf too. )
Even though the arguement for Schapelle's release from prison is now based purely on humanitarian grounds, due to her severe mental illness, the subject of her innocence should never be forgotten, or brushed under the carpet as irrelevant.
It is the agony of being innocent, yet having to face up to the horrors of a 20 year sentence in the squalor, hatred and violence of a third world prison cell, which has contributed to Schapelle's mental demise.
Schapelle asked Tony Wilson once:
"Tony, when will my innocence count for something, anything?"
To those who love her and support her, as I do, her innocence already counts for a hell of a lot, however for many others, her innocence may never count at all.
To Schapelle, her innocence is everything, and I believe that she would rather die than admit to a crime which she did not commit. I pray that it does not come down to this.
Hi Harry.
Names such as Randy Sachs, the ‘Marauke Five’, Samantha Orabator, David Hicks, Kelly Trueman, Rachel Diaz and her travelling partners, amongst others, have all benefited hugely from FPSS behind the scenes advice and contacts, as have their respective home government politicians who routinely ask FPSS for advice on how to proceed. FPSS were a big part of getting 3 of the Bali Nine off the death penalty too.
However it's very involved so I have also forwarded your query to Kay, perhaps she will reply to your question in more detail. Perhaps you should email FPSS?
Cheers.
As for your 2nd question, if you are a longtime Corby supporter, or if you happened to have read the latest Who magazine and read the quotes from former Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, you already know the answer.
Suffice to say the successful strategies that worked in the other prisoners cases have still not been adopted for Schapelle. Another media strategy was chosen instead, with no 3rd party experts utilized to develop a Diplomatic Intervention.
Mate, maybe the media campaign will sway the right people this time. It would save a lot of heart ache. But it hasn't yet after five long years of trying. And that's scary. Hence why myself and other supporters are curious to see a completely different strategy adopted. One that even politicians endorse!
I know that I have seen Kay on BBC speaking about the Orabator case, also speaking to the ABC, Who magazine and countless other media on the topic of foreign prisoners. Obviously she is being contacted because she is an expert in the matter.
Rob:
I have never understood how Schapelle could be guilty, because I don't see how a passenger can get 4.2 kg of marijuana through airport security in a Western industrialized country.
But I also believe that the question of her guilt or innocence no longer matters.
We don't have to agree on her guilt or innocence. All we have to agree on is that sentence is too harsh and that it's time for her to come home.
On that basis, will you work with us?
Crazy Canuck, Canada
I think the efforts of FPSS and myself don't need defending or justifying. Most everyone in Australia has a good idea now how these cases should be handled and many prisoners throughout the world are being helped. If our efforts were not working then we wouldn't be called on by families and prisoners and even Governments to assist.
In any case, this is not a 'pissing match' (apologies for the colourful analogy) and I'm content with the knowledge that I have hundreds of letters from prisoners and families who appreciate our support. As another writer posted, there's evidence enough out there to substantiate our value to the community.
Many times FPSS has offered detailed strategies and expert advice and offers of assistance from our extensive network of contacts, to the Corby case. In fact Murray, who does a great deal of work with FPSS, and was representative of the Schapelle Awareness Campaign at our Homebake stall in Sydney (along with Kathryn Bonella), has presented many of those strategies on behalf of FPSS.
To date, our offer has not been engaged because the matter is being handled the way the family wish it to be handled. As I have said, time and time again, it's perfectly fine if family members want to 'run the campaign' - that is their choice and it is their RIGHT. But don't be surprised by the outcome if it ends up like we are seeing now.
International Affairs are complex matters and it takes a great deal of experience, skill and know how to yield positive results.
On a personal note, after my own wrongful detainment in Laos, I spent a long time trying to find justice. I extensively researched every single avenue, every piece of legislation and you could say that for a time, I was even obsessed. In this journey, I forged many contacts from clerks to Congressmen. My involvement in other high profile cases, along the way, too has enabled me to gain a very important understanding, that there are many injustices in the world. Sometimes there is no rectifying the wrong.
The bottom line here should not be a discussion on justifying the existence of FPSS, or me defending myself on why I choose to help others, like Schapelle. The bottom line is that whether you agree or not that she is guilty or innocent, she is still a prisoner. She is still not coping. She clearly needs assistance to enable her to survive her ordeal. That should be the basis of her supporter's quest, not to undermine and destroy the desire of others to help, albeit they are not 'true believers'.
Kay Danes
Advocate FPSS
Murray...
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. Comments are always appreciated.
I don't know that I was suggesting that the animosity was universal, but rather the tone of some of the comments to this posted were indicative of some disagreement that had left a sour taste for some.
Thanks for the clarification and the link.
Harry...
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a couple of comments. Comments are always appreciated.
Although, I am guessing that some will see these questions as being a little self-serving on the ego stroking front.
But, I guess, they do give Murray a chance to elaborate.
Simba...
I accept that to Schapelle her innocence is important.
I am not suggesting that it be swept under the carpet. I am suggesting that, even by your admission, there are more important issues that need to be focused upon in order to get her repatriated to Australia for treatment (or at least placed in a facility in Indonesia that can provide her the quality care and treatment that she needs) in order that she can cope.
I agree, if she had not be caught with 4.1kgs of marijuana, or she had been found innocent, then we would not be having this interaction now and there would be no need for me to be making any posts about her plight.
The truth is that she was caught, the truth is that she was convicted, and the final truth is that she was sentenced to 20 years for that crime.
Her question to Tony Wilson is a good one. But, the answer may well be, never. However, the more important question is not about innocence, but rather about health and well-being.
All of my comments in response to commenters on this thread and elsewhere have only been with a view to focusing discussion on an issue that is more relevant at this point in time, the young woman's health and well-being.
Murray...
Thanks for the data. Where can this information be found?
Is it on the FPSS website?
Jacqui...
Sometimes being recognized as having expertise in a particular field draws extreme reaction, particularly from those that will do anything to undermine any legitimacy that "expert" has.
Happens all the time.
Crazy Canuck...
Not sure I can help you if you post as crazy canuck. Who am I helping and what do you envisage my contribution to be?
On getting it through airports, Schapelle's supporters argue along the lines of cocaine shipments that have been seized, and presumably others that got through, at Sydney's international airport as examples of how it happens.
So, personally, just because it seems fanciful that 4+kgs of wacky weed made its way through the airport is not in and of itself proof of innocence.
Kay...
Thanks for the detailed post.
Colourful analogy or not some of the comments that have made there way onto this thread are pretty good examples of a pissing match.
It is strange, and a little weird, for me as I have always thought that the idea now related more to repatriation than a continual drive to prove evidence.
For me, another colourful analogy as it relates to the evidence, is pissing up the wall. Unless, there is new evidence it would seem that this route is probably done.
As I have been saying all along, the focus needs to change, if it is a pre-condition to believe in the girl's innocence for you to be accepted into the fold then there is a lot of potential help out there being pushed away. To me this hardly seems to be in the best interests of Schapelle Corby.
Hmmmm.
Interesting to see now who has anything to do and or say on this blog....
Gaile
I thing Mercedes should be on 'Dancing with the Stars'
Gaile...
Indeed, it has been an interesting learning experience for me.
However, it is an open thread. So, anyone who wants to comment can. I generally hope that people keep it civil and reasonably polite. On the most part that is how the comments on this thread have transpired.
Although, it seems that there has been some identity theft going on with people posting comments pretending to be someone they are not.
I have always encouraged anonymous posters to adopt at least a pen name so that I can distinguish one from the other.
I would note that over at freeschapelle.com forum both Nev and Morpheus have suggested that my blog is of limited readership and limited influence and should be allowed to die.
I am not signing on to the forum and therefore I cannot leave a comment over there. I would add that the blog will not die. I would agree it has limited readership even though I have 70 followers or so and up to 1000 hits per day (and growing). I have never claimed to be a blog that is going to change public policy or that the shakers and movers in Indonesia and Australia make my blog the first thing they open in the morning when they get online.
Nevertheless, the idea that Indonesians are not taking notice of what is being written and discussed in the blogosphere on the other millions of blogs out there, forums, online radio, and podcasts, is a little naive.
It is also bizarre that Schapelle's supporters think in such a way. Part of the program must surely be to convince ordinary Indonesians of the miscarriage of justice that Schapelle has been victim to.
Surely, if there was support for Schapelle's release from the Indonesian side combined with Australian support then this must surely be more effective, mustn't it?
Oh well, perhaps I should take Morpheus' advice and shut the comments section down (although I tend to think that he is more worried about the fact that as an open thread non-supporters and "conditional supporters" get equal voice)...
I trust you had a good weekend.
Gaile...
It is my understanding that you talk with her on a regular basis. You could suggest to her that there seems to be some support for such an effort.
Although, she is based in Bali right now, isn't she? Would she be comfortable being away from Schapelle at such a critical juncture in terms of Schapelle's health and mental condition?
Respectfully declined Kay Danes.I understand exactly why you would have to decline.
Hi Rob. You asked about data.
Most of what FPSS and their contacts do is via private phone calls, emails, faxes, texts, letters, face to face meetings. So it's mostly done on the quiet.
And the web page FPSS maintains is a nexus to highlight general news about the prisoners and their plights.
Cheers.
Rob - I know Morpheus and I can say with confidence that his "let it die" suggeston on forum was meant to refer to this thread, not your blog in general. And we are not worried about non-supporters or people with legitimate questions about the case for Schapelle's innocence. It's the wackos on our own side that are sometimes a problem, such as the elderly woman who broke in to Downer's residence to berate him about Schapelle. We sensible supporters worry about the image that sort of thing gives the movement, hence Nev's and Morph's concern.
Desert Rat is hereby an Aussie:
"Honorary cheeky Aussie Bugger"
Dear Gaille, FPSS would respectfully decline any offer of money from Mercedes Corby because we do not take money from PRISONERS or their FAMILIES. It's as simple as that. We DO NOT profit from the misfortune of others, and we are all strictly volunteers.
I would suggest that, if the opportunity arose, my advice to Ms Corby would be to make the benefactor someone with an Indonesian focus. Perhaps the orphanage her publicist Steve Moriarty is media contact for?
http://www.careforkidsbali.com/contact_us.html
This would be more strategic on her part. It would create a platform on which she and her supporters could build that would benefit the local Indonesian people and over time, they might even begin to see the Corbys and her supporters in a new, more favourable light.
Dancing with the stars?? pffft! Lets give the public more of a reason to believe her family is using her plight as a money making scheme?? I have been supporting sice the beginning....and i have given up opn all support groups as they all slowly made schapelle look more and more a joke! thsi is the stupidest idea i have ever heard of and i agree with Kay....
x peace
Hi Rob Just a quick question, I know you believe that by Indonesian standards the verdict was just, but did the Indonesian court produce enough evidence to support a guilty verdict for drug TRAFFICKING? My understanding is that she was given a further 10 years as she was convicted of drug trafficking. What proof was given that she was going to sell it herself? Drug smuggling I don't believe was proven, thats a given but they didn't even attempt to prove intent to sell, yet she is supposidly a trafficker?
Gaile...
Yes, Kay explained why they would not be in a position to accept the cash.
I also not that in a later post there is a good suggestion about helping a local charity in Bali or somewhere else in Indonesia.
This is sort of what I am referring to when I suggested that building a base of Indonesian supporters would be a good idea.
Murray...
I kind of figured as much on the nitty gritty.
But, thanks for the clarification.
Desert Rat...
I guessed as much that he was referring to the thread. However, I still intend to post about developments in the case.
I find it interesting, though, the things you are not worried about. This tends to suggest, at least to me, that you think the Schapelle Corby support base is big enough already, and it is only a matter of weeding out the wackos from your ranks.
Gaile...
So there have been some benefits from posting here afterall, at least for Desert Rat.
Kay...
Thanks for the clarification.
The suggestion also seems like a good one.
It would certainly counter any suggestion that Mercedes was in it just for the money, particularly if she donates it all to a charity.
Furthermore, I think the idea of building local support in Indonesia for Schapelle is an important part of the puzzle.
I have been told on a regular basis that I am ill-informed as to what is happening and what has been happening on the ground in Indonesia. So, perhaps Schapelle's supporters are already doing that, supporting a local charity in Bali or somewhere in Indonesia.
Good will is often rewarded with good will.
Is this Rob guy trying to organise a full-on protest outside parliament house or what!?? Who is he?
Anonymous...
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. Comments are always appreciated. I do not know whether you are a previous anonymous commenter or someone new.
I always ask my anonymous posters to adopt a pen name (preferably not someone else's real name or pen name -- few impersonators floating around on this thread). It just makes it easier to distinguish one from the other.
Onto the substance. I am not sure that it is the stupidest idea ever. There is certainly the potential for this to be played as a money spinner for the family as they cash in on Schapelle's misfortune.
However, in contrast, if it is handled properly then it has the potential to do a number of good things. Focus attention on mental illness in general, and for Schapelle specifically.
It is a chance to get some coverage of the seriousness of the situation. And, any money made could be, as Kay suggests, donated to a worthy local charity. This would also placate in many regards any Indonesian objections to the publicizing of Schapelle's plight.
However, if it just became a forum to espouse more of, "Indonesia is a despicable place", "Schapelle is innocent and was framed by corrupt Immigration officials and police", or "the marijuana should have been DNA tested," then this effort will ultimately do more harm than good.
Anonymous...
Use a pen name.
If you want to know who I am then do a search. Most of the info is available either in the blog or online.
Nope, not trying to organize a full-on protest in front of parliament house. I am also not advocating home invasions.
I am suggesting that the idea of building an inclusive movement that works cooperatively is more likely to succeed than the very ad hoc nature of things that are seemingly happening at the moment.
If there is a movement of which I am not aware that is working all the angles, then so be it. I have not claimed to be an insider or have any specific knowledge of the Corbys.
There is nothing wrong with commenting from the outside looking in, in a civil manner, while trying to learn more, is there?
Let me say firstly, that I think Schapelle was poorly represented and advised, hence this coupled with the media frenzy, did not help her case.
Reading through the final verdict transcript of the Court it states clearly the charge. "Without right and against the law to import group 1 narcotic."
They clarify the word 'import' which they match up to the articles of laws relevant to 'Customs' and state that importing is not only to the country, but into the customs area. They break it down further by saying that the accused brought her BBB into the customs area and they use this to also substantiate that she imported.
They used more than two pieces of evidences:
1. that the evidence is a group 1 narcotic;
2. that the accussed (Corby) did not have a permit from the Minister of Health (Indonesia) to bring the narcotic into the country.
This breaches Article 78 section (1) Letter-a Acts Number 22, Year 1979 on Narcotics. AND it also states that the lawyer and the accussed did not state or file an exception to the accusation. My guess is that Schapelle had no idea what was going on, and that her Indonesian lawyers may not have fully explained this to her Australian lawyer.
3. Boarding pass
4. Customs declaration
5. Departure card
6. Qantas ticket
7. Passport
Obviously they have taken the content 'text' from customs declaration as evidence, and not necessarily in context.
They also add to that evidence a justification because she knows what the 9. drug is, and that 10. it is in her bag...
They don't say that she intended to distribute, rather they say that she could distribute.... so hence she wasn't charged with trafficking.
It goes on to say "Considering that the primary accusation has been authenticated legally and firmly, Board of Judges did not need to authenticate Subsidiary Accusation as well as more subsidiary accusations."
The judges discounted the witness statements of Schapelle's travel companions because as stated "the three witnesses could not show who is the owner if it did not belong to the accused."
The judges discounted the witness statements of others based on similar grounds.
The judges concluded that the lawyers had basically not presented a convincing argument, and that the facts were subjective.
In the summary of implications they list that "The action of the Accussed of importing narcotic constitutes transnational crimes'. They were originally asking for a life sentence but reduced this because of her polite manner.
It truly is a shame that she was not properly represented or advised culturally. It most certainly would have had less extreme repercussions for her. We can argue injustice till the cows come home. It won't change what has happened. That's just unrealistic to think that it will.
We see these sorts of things happening often, where there are judicial processes that may not be properly executed, or perhaps certain interpretation of law is confusing, or thought to be unfair according to western standards, and many times too, there may even be breech of judicial obligations, and sometimes, violation of obligations that are prevented from being challenged. Even so, there is little that can be done to rectify these, hence why, when defending a foreigner in a foreign court, the best approach is to engage a good legal team that have experience in the law pertaining to the State, and are culturally sensitive, and skilful in the art of negotiation if all fails. These situations are then best going into diplomatic interventions/negotiations.
Kay Danes
Advocate FPSS
SWH...
I think that Kay has pretty much answered the substance of your question.
In any event, my understanding is that the prosecution did not to prove any distribution network or that she had any contacts with dealers in Bali or elsewhere in Indonesia.
She had 4.1kgs in her possession. This was rightly deemed not to be for personal use. Apparently her urine tests were clean. Therefore, the drugs in her possession were deemed to be for the purposes of supply.
Further, my understanding is that under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act of NSW (2005) that a traffickable quantity of drugs where there is no legitimate reason for that person to have the drugs, then sees the drugs to be deemed as being for supply (Art. 29).
Still running through the relevant laws in Indonesia and here for comparative purposes.
Kay...
Thanks. Saves me doing it all over.
If some of these supporters are trying to get her home, why are they wasting their time here trying to discredit and belittle good people, who seem to want the same thing, when they could actually be doing something positive? It shouldn't matter whether someone believes Schapelle is guilty or innocent, but whether she should be repatriated or treated in an Australian care facility. As long as this continues to be about Schapelle, her situation will not improve. The focus needs to be on the mental health of all prisoners. I'm not sure she would qualify under a normal PTA, if it even existed, so it would be best to keep the focus on prisoner well being. This should be handled quietly and not in the spotlight. I sincerely hope the DWTS was a joke.
Did I miss Gaile's links somewhere or were they all sent privately? If they were private I wish they had posted publicly.
Would have been nice to find out more background information on Larry Ho. It seems like he ran away which is a pity if he had so much to offer. I wonder if the link about him was right? I certainly hope not as Schapelle does not need more people trying to exploit her situation.
Irene...
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. Comments are always appreciated.
I have a slightly different take on DWTS. Although, I appreciate the need for negotiations to be handled in a certain manner, preferably quietly and low key.
I, nevertheless, think that if handled properly there could be some benefit.
There would be some Schapelle Corby angle to it, but I have stated before it needs to focus on issues other than a debate baout whether she is guilty or innocent.
If it were to focus on mental health issues relating to Australians incarcerated overseas, or even just in Indonesia, and any funds generated were ploughed into an Indonesian mental health NGO that assists incarcerated prisoners, then I think there is the possibility of an upside to an appearance on DWTS by Mercedes.
However, having spent the afternoon viewing some Corby family classics courtesy of YouTube, I am almost certain that the Corby's could not pull the DWTS gig off. This would mean the downside is likely to far outweigh any upside in terms of publicity.
So, perhaps a quiet diplomatic approach might work.
On the mental illness front, there needs to be confirmation one way or the other as to Schapelle Corby's mental state. Dr. Phillips is stating that she is certifiably insane whereas the prison shrink in Bali is saying that all is well and that Corby has a treatable depression.
I have always been led to believe that it is pretty hard to fake clinically diagnosed insanity, but not impossible. So, perhaps some research on any connection between the Corby's and the good doctor is warranted. Although, I would be surprised that a Doctor of Phillips standing would be prepared to risk a career on an untrue diagnosis, but I guess stranger things have happened.
There is little doubt that Schapelle, her family, and her supporters could use some experienced professional assistance in negotiating their way through this maze.
Just some thoughts.
It would also seem that Larry Ho has quiet a number of aliases. This would seem to undermine the legitimacy of each and everyone of them. Either that or Larry Ho has a lot of qualifications and he ascribes each personality a set of qualifications.
Rob better make his mind up. Become compassionate and understnad Western law. Otherwise, he is sitting on the fence. Have to be one way or the other. Understanding or extremely corrupt (Indonesian method).
You are not in a position to state how you feel the verdict of this case should have been. None of us are. Firstly, you don't know this girl. Secondly, you're only going on bits of information that ONLY Schapelle could answer (none of us can). Please stop playing the high and mighty on such a painful topic... This is no way to show support to the Corby family. Shame on you. Can't be a Christian and Muslim at the same time. Make up your mind. Be a supporter or leave...
Rob,
Just one on the conditions of the hospitals in Indonesia. FPSS has done extensive research on this.
According to our in-country researchers, the state hospital, Sanglah Hospital has a fairly new international wing for foreigners and is very modern. It is a rather large complex with units dealing with every kind of medical problem. It has an emergency unit for locals and is overwhelmed most times, and is not particularly well-equipped because of the amount of people it has to treat but in general, taking into account the fact that Bali is still struggling from past economic downturns, facilities in the emergency unit are good.
Bangli Hospital is one of the best in Bali which deals mostly with drug addicts and psychiatric cases, usually criminals, and those close to release. Their staff are well trained and are frequently updating their skills and knowledge through international conferences and visiting physicians. The hospital itself has picturesque rural surroundings.
There is a prison on Madura Island off the East Java coast. It has a special clinic that is fully staffed with doctors and nurses who specialise in drug addiction, especially illicit drug addiction. It is very clean and well-organised.
Lock your bags Rob...
My goodness Anonymous... sounds very much like you are threatening Rob.
Rob: my advice to you would be to make sure all the doors to your house are locked. These 'radical types' claiming to be Corby Supporters are becoming quite frustrated or desperate, or both. That is very concerning! I would urge you to keep a record of their IP address etc.. and pass on to the AFP as a precaution. It's not that difficult to trace who is who on the internet as you already know.
Dear Anonymous,
Maybe you should leave as this seems to be Rob's blog, not yours! Anonymous said, "Can't be a Christian and Muslim at the same time. Make up your mind. Be a supporter or leave..."
It does no good to rehash what did or did not happen. It cannot be changed. I don't care if she or her family actually committed the crime. It's never been about that for me. I think she's gotten a raw deal, especially for a first time offender. I believe it's time for her repatriation but that doesn't mean I think she's innocent or guilty. It appears to me that you are trying to tell me that I can't care about her well being without picking a side? You will never build the support you want or need by making this about her. You have to focus on her illness, because frankly I am tired of hearing about "the wronged Corby's". You are also doing a bang-up job in clarifying that her supporters ARE rational and kind-hearted people. I bet there are some sane supporters out there, who truly understand the situation, I just wonder if they have been subjected to the likes of you?
Anonymous...
There is a key difference between you and me, and that is in our anonymity. I choose to blog under my own name, you can search me if you want (I would suggest using quotation marks to narrow the search) and you choose to troll blogs and other sites either under the moniker 'anonymous' or under pen names.
I wonder whether you are just another incarnation of Larry Ho, or Morpheus, or Steve Addison? Not that it matters, as most potential Corby supporters are turned off by such ranting and threats.
Onto the substance of your comments. Perhaps you should read the 290 comments that permeate this thread. You will see that I have been pro-repatriation from the start. So, I am wondering what compassion I am supposed to adopt now?
Or is it a case that compassion can only be proved by adopting the "she was framed" mantra and therefore innocent?
On understanding Western Law. I understand well enough, perhaps as well as you do, or maybe even better. Having lived in Indonesia for very many years, I probably also have a very good grasp of comparative law between the Indonesian and Australian systems of law.
Ah yes, another mantra, Corby is only guilty because the system is corrupt. Perhaps the stars were aligned against her as well.
I am voicing an opinion. I do not need to know the young woman personally to do that. I am not seeking specific pieces of information that only Schapelle could answer that are not already part of the public record. I am not playing any high and mighty role, and perhaps a cursory reading of the comments to date would illuminate this for you.
Shame on me? Mate, the only shame that needs to be acknowledged around here are with the people who claim to be supporters but in actual fact undermine the cause by abusing and trying to belittle anyone that does not ascribe to some twisted logic about what this case is about.
This is so not a Christian vs. Muslim thing. But, I find it mildly amusing in a very disturbing way that the logic is you are either with us or against us. And, the "with us" requires that you adopt the line of the "freeschapelle" forum or you are hounded away.
At this rate, and with supporters like you, Schapelle's chances of being repatriated in anything other than a pine box are dwindling by the day, Shame on You!
Kay...
Thanks for the information.
I was aware of these facts. But, perhaps other readers are not so well-informed on these matters.
Once again, thanks.
Anonymous...
I find it hard to take anything you say as support either for Schapelle Corby or any movement to bring the young woman home.
The threat, belies the problem that the Corbys and Schapelle's legitimate supporters have; distancing themselves from those who seek to scare and create fear among those who do not give the proverbial "rat's arse" about her guilt or innocence, but who believe that for a first-time offender 20 years is harsh (and for some of us in the know who realize that even by Indonesian standards this was harsh).
Lock my bags. As a matter of course, I do! But, thanks for the tip.
Kay...
My goodness, indeed.
And, if people were ever wondering why this has gone on as long as it has and why Schapelle was not given a much more lenient sentence or released some time ago, needs only to look at the comments posted by those not even courageous enough to post under their own name.
These sorts of threats against individuals who might not be convinced of her innocence but are more convinced that the time might be right for her to be repatriated might be turned off offering such support.
The benefits of this thread ave been that I am more inspired to do the research to uncover the validity or lack thereof of some of the claims posted here.
Links like why a doctor would go to the lengths of spending a week with Schapelle and then declare her clinically insane while well-qualified doctors in Indonesia maintain that she is depressed, but that the depression can be treated with the appropriate medication.
I am going to take a stab in the dark and say that some of the Corby supporters here would attribute this to this huge conspiracy between Indonesia and Australia to victimize this particular individual.
But the most salient point, and it has been made a few times by myself and others. Is that there is no chance of a pardon if Schapelle is clinically insane. The reality is that standard Indonesian practice would require an admission of guilt and some remorse for one's actions.
Simply, if she is insane then she will not have the legal capacity to make the admission or show remorse. Unfortunately, you cannot have it both ways on the clinically insane deal.
Clemency, who knows? Personally, the Indonesians would gain negligible good will from a release and SBY would come under some heavy fire for being lenient on drug importers. This is particular so, when one of the primary statements in the verdict related to the damage 4.1kgs of wacky weed could do to future generations of Indonesians.
On the locking of doors. I do this already.
On passing the information to the AFP. I have the log files saved and there are printed copies. I have started doing this to try and find the connections between some of the anonymous posters.
Tracing people with more technical know -how than I might be a little difficult for me, but I have been told what information I need to keep and hand off to others in order that those with the know-how and resources can.
Irene...
It is indeed my blog. But, I would add that it is an open thread, so to each their own.
For me the threat is an interesting one, but I am thinking it is alluding to the conspiracy theory of Schapelle was framed and that if I do not lock my bags, then maybe some corrupt immigration or customs officer will target me.
Rehashing what cannot be changed does seem like an exercise in the futile, but, once again, to each their own. It seems that for some their is a fixation on Schapelle's alleged innocence of the crime for which she has been convicted. It also seems, at least to me, to be a mantra that if you repeat it long enough, then everyone is going to throw up their hands in unison and go, "why haven't I seen this before, the girl is obviously innocent!" It is not going to happen.
This garbage of "you are either with us or against us" is so very much undermining legitimate support for Schapelle. The antics of her family and a whole series of YouTube videos probably do not help when they are combined with die hard supporters who know little of the facts but who can only recite the standard mantra.
As I have said elsewhere, this kind of support will ensure that Schapelle does not see the light of freedom until her sentence is complete.
For me, that is not support.
All...
For anyone that is interested this is how this thread expanded and developed in the way that it did.
http://www.freeschapelle.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3411
Enjoy.
Hi Rob,
The 'insane' diagnosis, detailed in the report paid for by the New Idea Magazine, was (as is reported) based on a one hour interview according to the Kerobokan Prison Doctor and other sources.
I find it hard to believe that a man of Dr. Phillip's integrity would have actually diagnosed her 'clinically insane', after all, this is not a term used today in the field of mental illness or so I have been informed by doctors working in the field.
I think the NI magazine may have used artistic licence to sensationalise Schapelle's current situation. This is not to say that she isn't suffering because even the Indonesian doctors at the prison have agreed that she is suffering depression and this is a terrible but treatable, legitimate illness.
Based on my observations of this case, it stands to reason, if we analyze the situation objectively, knowing the political climate and the history of this case being played out in the media, then it is not unreasonable to assume that the Indonesian Government will not take any drastic measures in transferring Schapelle to Australia. This also seems to be acknowledged by the Australian Government in so far as Foreign Minister Stephen Smith has stated publicly QUOTE: "The only way she can return to Australia is if we effect a international transfer of prisoner agreement between Australia and Indonesia."
http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/transcripts/2009/090903_abc.html
So the best outcome that we can realistically hope for, unless a PTA is put in place quickly and with provisions for Schapelle, is that she be moved to a local mental hospital for prisoners, and treated there. Clearly however, the Indonesians would not see this as a long term option. They would expect her to recover, as is likely, with proper care. Certainly, what should be a priority for her supporters, is to encourage a better way forward to stabilise her.
You have raised some valid points in regards to clemency which tie in with the alleged diagnosis. This option, according to the legislation in Indonesia, may not be open to Corby and you have articulated the points well. I hope that the report is convincing enough that the Indonesian doctors will put forth a recommendation for Schapelle to be repatriated to a mental health prison facility in Australia, but we shall have to wait and see if the report, once translated, is properly marched through that process.
It is an absolute shame that more care wasn't given to this 'mental health strategy'. The appropriate approach would have been for a round table discussion/assessment, between Dr. Phillips, DFAT and the respective Indonesian counterparts.
The way it has been handled is clearly a reflection of the inexperience of those handling the matter, or rather, not handling it. Understandably, the family have no experience in how these matters are done and should be done. This confirmed by Mercedes Corby to Louise Talbot in the recent WHO magazine.
"We don't know where to go from here" said Mercedes.
Organisations such as SANE may be able to provide Mercedes with some of that much needed direction, and I for one, certainly hope they do. But they too need to be realistic as to their expectations in respect to the broader aspects associated with foreign internment.
There is an opportunity here for wider discussion on mental illness in prisoners but I think that Schapelle may only be afforded the same standard of care and availability of care, as other Australians detained overseas, some of which suffer depression and are unhappy with their circumstances.
I unfortunately had experience with a foreign prisoner saga some years ago and am familiar with what is called the prisoner market in posts some people already made. I feel very sorry for Schapelle Corby but I am writing this post as those by Mr Murray and Reverand Mick and others have been pointed out to me. I am replying anonymously because of my previous experience I mentioned.
Mr Murray and Reverand Mick, you seem to be close to the FPSS as supporters or as staff so maybe you might answer some questions.
a) How much does the FPSS and staff make every year from media interviews?
b) From books?
c) From spin offs?
d) Schapelle Corby is easily the most lucrative part of this so called market. To be up to date how much was Alan Shadrake paid for his part in that article in Who that I read at the weekend? For that size article on another case the full article rate was between $5000 and $10000. If that was the sort of money here, do you know what the arrangement was between Talbot-Shadrake and the FPSS or Mrs Danes for their input? And aren't Mr Shadrake and Mrs Danes of FPSS friends outside this story? Can you provide what I think people call transparency so we know what all the arrangements were and how it all worked? I am not accusing anything I am asking.
e) How much extra would the article have been worth if for example Mercedes Corby had been on side for it? I know it is a lot, but how much more? Do you know how many times more? Can you give me an estimate?
f) Don't you think it looks like FPSS and Mrs Danes appear to want control of this case? This idea comes across to me in many of the writings about leaving it to the experts and such. It seems obvious that Mercedes Corby won't hand it over though. Is that a reason why she cops for so much criticism of her handling from people? Do you think that words critical of her help the chances of her efforts to free her sister or harm them? How much harm do you think it has already done to those chances?
g) This isn't the only case with which a family doesn't want FPSS running it for them is it? I can answer that directly, it certainly is not. It isn't the only case in which FPSS have responded in a way which has severely distressed a family is it? Stephen Sutton comes to my mind http://machinegunkeyboard.com/?p=90. Would you comment Mr Murray or Reverand Mick on that and explain it? Stephen was brought home without FPSS involvement.
h) You imply that most Schapelle Corby supporters are positive to FPSS. Where do you get that idea from? I personally found that hardly any I talked to have heard of them and the ones closest to the family are not positive. The only positives look like thay come from those close to FPSS people. So what makes you think this?
Do you not think that any organization which claims to support foreign prisoners should resist making or encouraging comments which harm the people trying to save them? Is that not what is in the best interests of the prisoner? I cannot see how pressuring the family does anything other than harm the prisoner and with Schapelle Corby in the present circumstance maybe even fately. This must be so on the scale it is happening here.
I always thought that, but having read this blog even more so with this case.
Last of all can someone please pass on to me the Corby family's contact details as I have something to send them? Thanks.
Sorry for so many questions.
Anonymous...
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. Comments are always appreciated.
You do not have to use your real name, but you could adopt a pen name as a means of distinguishing you from other anonymous posters. At least that way I do not have to do IP searches to find out if you have posted before.
I will leave the specific questions for Murray and Rev. Mick and Kay Danes for them to answer themselves. I have no involvement in FPSS and have no involvement with the Corby family.
On the Corby family details maybe someone from the forum can provide those. Maybe they are available, or there is a contact address for correspondence, on one of the many support forums.
As I said, I am not privy to those details.
All...
Interesting article on Schapelle Corby's mental state and the view of her psychiatrist in Bali.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25996596-25837,00.html
I have also added a post script to the post " Schapelle Corby -- Insane..." which you can find here:
http://therabexperience.blogspot.com/2009/08/schapelle-corby-insane.html
Rob B.
You have definitely come a long way in the last couple of weeks. In your knowledge of Schapelle Corby as against your original talk about Robin Tampoe.
It remains to be seen just how far you will go.
Backwards or forwards. Depending on your stance. One wonders, do you think, in some ways, you have lost your original objectivity.
I think so.
I don't know if you were impartial to Robin Tampoe, or Corby. It is hard to read bloggers' minds at the best of times.
Impartial? I think not.
That in itself is an interesting 'turn of events' don't you think?
Anonymous...
I can see that you have decided against taking the pen name option. That is too bad. I guess people will always wonder about your objectivity, subjectivity, and impartiality when you do not have the courage of your convictions.
Perhaps you should take the time to rad the other posts that I have made on Schapelle Corby, if you haven't already, as this will address the impartiality issue.
Yes, I have learned much over this past several weeks, particularly about those people who call themselves supporters of the young woman.
Am I impartial with regards to Robin Tampoe? I do not know the man. My original post related to him being struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners. It really was not a post directly discussing most of the issues that have now stretched this thread into 300+ comments.
Not quiet sure what you mean by "remains to be seen how far you will go". What do you mean?
If you are suggesting that I will drop my bundle on her guilt and start advocating her innocence, not going to happen unless there is new evidence brought into play that would support such a change of position. I think that the evidence required is not currently available and I do not see it becoming available.
However, if you have new evidence, then feel free to share it.
I am being objective. However, I am guessing here that you are alluding to the Larry Ho position that I am being played like a piano. I am objective, perhaps more so than most, just because I think the young woman is guilty is not an issue of objectivity, unless of course if you are saying that everyone who thinks that she is guilty has lost their objectivity. Are you?
What is an interesting turn of events?
Murray has been a long time supporter of FPSS as has Rev. Mick. In fact, FPSS has a long association with many people and organisations. I've already explained that FPSS are strictly all volunteers.
Most of the work I do is voluntary. I am an author but the focus of my last books were to highlight social justice. The little I make in royalties helps me to continue doing good throughout the world, helping families of prisoners and all the other charitible events and activities I am involved in. I donate a great deal of money to these charities. Not that it is any of your business.
Again you talk of foreign markets Larry, but Schapelle's family have benefited from interviews yet you don't question that. As for how much Alan Shadrake is paid for his work as a journalist I don't know. I suspect like most people who 'work' he doesn't do it for free.
I certainly have no imput into his articles. I'm not his editor.
WHO magazine don't pay, you can confirm this with them and I'm more than happy to waiver any privacy that might otherwise prevent disclosure.
I don't need to be paid to stand up for prisoner's rights! Hence all the media I have done in the past has all been for free in the hope that it will assist prisoners. Even my own story was given to ABC Australia Story and everyone knows they don't pay!
I guess while you are attacking me, you are leaving some other poor soul alone. As for me being friends with Alan Shadrake, I guess you would also imply that I am personal friends with PM Rudd and everyone else I have dealings with?
Mercedes turned the Who Magazine article down. You can confirm this with her publicist and/or Louise Talbot. Hence why Talbot came to me, and to Tony Wilson for comment to help raise awareness of Schapelle's plight. No tony wilson didn't get paid either. No I don't want control of this case Larry, Steve or whoever you are when you are yourself. The last thing I've ever wanted is control.
I'm not going to get into slagging Mercedes despite your attempt to have me do just that. What Mercedes does is her business.
Not everyone wants FPSS assistance and I've said to you before, that that is fine. Some families do handle things well and they know that if they need anything, we will be there. They don't have to engage us. After all, we don't need the hours it takes to help connect people. Particularly, when we don't get paid.
Stephen Suttons' case was hijacked at one point by someone similar to your type. But I have a lovely letter from his sister and from Stephen himself, following his return home, grateful for our support. That person who attempted to do what you are attempting to do now was disgruntled when FPSS wouldn't go against Stephen Suttons wishes. This is well documented in correspondence we have between Sutton, Conops and his sister. I am happy to provide evidence of this to Rob in private, but will not make this public because it would be inappropriate.
Nothing I have said here is detrimental to Schapelle Corby or her family. I have the right to defend myself, as does everyone else. In this blog I have responded to accusations from so called Schapelle Supporters who do not represent the views of the mainstream Schapelle support group.
Here is a beginning
What is Clinical Depression?
When we refer to depression in the following pages, we are talking about "clinical depression." Clinical depression is a serious medical illness that negatively affects how you feel, the way you think and how you act. Individuals with clinical depression are unable to function as they used to. Often they have lost interest in activities that were once enjoyable to them, and feel sad and hopeless for extended periods of time. Clinical depression is not the same as feeling sad or depressed for a few days and then feeling better. It can affect your body, mood, thoughts, and behavior. It can change your eating habits, how you feel and think, your ability to work and study, and how you interact with people. People who suffer from clinical depression often report that they "don't feel like themselves anymore."
Clinical depression is not a sign of personal weakness, or a condition that can be willed away. Clinically depressed people cannot "pull themselves together" and get better. In fact, clinical depression often interferes with a person's ability or wish to get help. Clinical depression is a serious illness that lasts for weeks, months and sometimes years. It may even influence someone to contemplate or attempt suicide.
People of all ages, genders, ethnicities, cultures, and religions can suffer from clinical depression. Each year it affects over 17 million American men and women (source: American Psychiatric Association). While clinical depression is common, it is frequently unrecognized and untreated.
There are different types and levels of clinical depression. Mental health counselors and psychiatrists are trained to diagnose and treat clinical depression. With the right treatment, most people who seek help get better within several months. Many people begin to feel better in just a few weeks.
To debunk what one of your followers has said on your public forum.
Ref is:http://www.uhs.berkeley.edu/lookforthesigns/clinicaldepression.shtml
Take it or leave it. These are not comments made by a 'lay' person. If you know what that means.
What has Robin Tampoe got to do with Schapelle's current situation? As to Rob and his research on the case... You are trying to gain support for Schapelle yet you support a country that doesn't value human life... hmmm... this is all certainly very confusing, some clarifying necessary! You also make the statement you 'think' she's guilty. It's good you say think because that's as far as it goes, you don't know. When people 'think', they must answer "I don't know" and no other way... Perhaps delete any posts that talk about whether or not she did it (including yours) to get the right kind of attention. What exactly are you trying to do? If it's to get Schapelle home maybe call the blog that. Just doesn't sell well the way it is at the moment. What about the many other Australians jailed in foreign countries?
Just some graphic design points of view.
You are really are quite sad. I feel very sorry for you. I hope you will find some peace of mind somehow.
Schapelle Corby is depressed as confirmed by Dr. Thong. I fully support that fact. I fully support that her health should be a priority. I fully support that if she requires special treatment, then she should be repatriated to a proper mental health facility. I have even written to the Australian Government requesting this.
I fully concur with her doctor's assessment. So why not go and attack someone else who is doing bad things to people? Instead of attacking good people who are known to do good for others. Or are you too bored with your life?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25996596-25837,00.html
This is why I did not ask the questions of you Mrs Danes. It was my only post yet you think that I am someone else. What is wrong with you?
Nothing changes.
Stephens case was not hijacked at all and you know it. I know it. The services of FPSS were not wanted and you know why. Yet it wasn't left there was it?
I see the same sort of thing now with the Corbys.
Can someone give me their contact details?
This thread is riveting darling and Mr Murray appears to have run away and Kay is talking on Mr Murray's behalf... ha!! ha!
Kay said: WHO magazine don't pay, you can confirm this with them and I'm more than happy to waiver any privacy that might otherwise prevent disclosure.
A spin off of not being paid is favorable publicity for FPSS or you miss Kay Danes darling!! you can't buy that amount of publicity.
Hi. Anonymous: You are posting too quickly hence the overlap.
Daphney, Murray I'm sure will get to replying if he thinks it's even worth it. He's another one that does a lot of good so I suppose it's only natural that he comes under fire. :-)
Nothing changes darling!
Or the spin off may be to generate public sympathy for someone who has been convicted of drug offences, and how does that endear me to the general public darling?
Tell me, I'm interested to know how you help Schapelle Corby and all the other Australians detained overseas? Darling!
The fact that you are attacking FPSS, Mrs. Danes, Mr. Murray and anyone else who all VOLUNTEER their time, effort, energies, and often times own money tells me that you actually have little understanding of what they really do. (http://www.usp.com.au/fpss/aboutus.html) I can't believe you even asked how much money they have made. I can't grasp just how much they have sacrificed from their own lives to help others. I imagine that what they may say or do is not always going to be the most popular to others, but they would really be ineffective in their line of work if they spent all their time sugar coating everything so as to not offend. People should to know exactly what to expect. It takes a special person to support prisoners regardless of innocence or guilt. Where the majority of society will discard prisoners and refer to them as a waste of life FPSS still sees them as human beings who have the potential for good in the world.
To which comments are you referring that you believe to have been damaging? If you want to analyze things that have been said and done that are damaging, maybe we should start with the Corby family and those they've engaged for assistance. I for one would love to see the transparency on all the articles, interviews, exclusives that have been done. Why not disclose the figures and costs to put a quick lid on the 'Cashed Up Bogan' rumors? Sure paying for the health and well-being of a loved one, detained in a foreign country, can take quite a toll on a family, but there are right and wrong ways to go about raising money. I'd expect that money would have to come from somewhere.
Kay...
I guess no end of clarification can satisfy some people.
Anonymous...
Once again, I see you still do not have the courage of your convictions to put your name to the comment.
I believe the term was insanity that was being bandied about in many reports talking about Schapelle's condition.
In any event, I have agreed she is depressed and that she needs treatment. Dr. Thong has also agreed and made the same diagnosis that she is depressed. If I am not mistaken the Dr. has prescribed anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medication, but is unsure whether she is taking it as she is supposed to.
In fact, if I am not mistaken, Dr. Thong is also advocating that Corby be moved to Bangli Mental Hospital, which as the name suggests is a specialist facility. This is so that more accurate and dedicated evaluation, monitoring, and treatment can be offered to Corby.
What is this garbage about whether Indonesia values human life. If a country has the death penalty in place does not mean that there is no value placed on life.
My personal opinion of the death penalty has been made clear in other posts. So, take the time to read a little before embarrassing yourself with statements inferring what others believe when you have absolutely no idea.
To be clear, I Schapelle Corby is guilty because I believe she did it. I am not going to delete any posts, except perhaps those where people like yourself impersonate others or threaten people. There is no need to delete any post where someone says they think the girl is guilty. People are entitled to their opinions on the matter.
In fact, I have been particularly generous to allow you to continue posting on this thread.
Mate...take a look at the blog! It is not, and has never been a blog about Schapelle Corby. The fact this is the most popular thread by a long way can be attributed to people such as yourself with your slights on others and your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
You severely undermine any efforts to get Schapelle home. You should be embarrassed by your own antics and not be teeing off on the majority of sensible discussion that can be had here and elsewhere.
This, by the way, is also not a blog dedicated to Australians incarcerated overseas. If there is another case that strikes or piques my interest, then I may write about it. For example, I have written about the Bali Nine as well within the pages of this blog.
However, I am not going to have content dictated to me by an anonymous poster.
Rattling on and trying to wiggle out of the worm-hole you have put yourself in Mrs Danes ain't gonna do you any good now.
Clinical depression and your 'lay person' interpretation of it does not bear even thinking about.
Quote:
Most of the work I do is voluntary.
Please clarify the other part of 'most'
I can go on and I will if necessary. However, there are 3 things I want to address now:
1. Your temerity in refuting the terminology of 'clinical depression'.
"I find it hard to believe that a man of Dr. Phillip's integrity would have actually diagnosed her 'clinically insane', after all, this is not a term used today in the field of mental illness or so I have been informed by doctors working in the field."
I think I have addressed that. If you would prefer to give me your 'eminently knowledgable contacts and written comments here' I may consider - consider - to acquiesce. However, I do not think that will be forthcoming, knowing your past history of innuendoe/s.
So you are an expert in this field,amongst all others, are you, Mrs Danes?
2. Where else do you derive your income?
3. Why do you say that the Corby family has no idea of how to about things?
quote:The way it has been handled is clearly a reflection of the inexperience of those handling the matter, or rather, not handling it. Understandably, the family have no experience in how these matters are done and should be done.
Are you saying that you are the only one who thinks she knows how to handle things?
I think not. You have to be kidding me. I know you are trying to kid and convince others but you do not fool me.
Kay...
I can imagine Anonymous here sitting in front of their computer thinking they are turning the tide of the debate.
Unfortunately, people will see it and whoever the commenter is for what they are.
Maybe I should leave what that is to the imagination of readers.
Anonymous...
I suggested where you might get a hold of the Corby contact details.
Go and have a look.
I know for a fact that Kay Danes was knocked back by Scott's family and I suspect the same with Jock Palfreyman. Hence her comments on him elsewhere.
Daffney...
Or is it Steve?
Have you got anything constructive to contribute to the conversation?
Hi Rob,
I think Anonymous is sitting in front of the computer with a nice bottle of red wine.... but is obviously not able to enjoy it.
I think I answered all the questions well enough. I'm not going to get drawn into any discussions that of are no benefit to Schapelle.
I could list the other work I do, for free, which is everything basically that I do. Lucky for me I have a wonderful husband who supports my philanthropic undertakings.
You could spend the next 24 hours insulting me, making insinuations and just waffling with bs.... but at the end of the day, how does that support Schapelle?
I would suggest you go read 'Schapelle' by Tony Wilson, and re-evaluate your commitment or spend a little more time writing letters to our government in support of her repatriation. That would be something useful now wouldn't it?
Irene...
I somehow think that your arguments will fall on deaf ears here. It seems those anonymous posters aligned against FPSS have a serious large beef, in their own minds, and will never get past it.
It is interesting though that they are seeking to bash FPSS yet do not have the testicular or ovarian fortitude to post under their own names nor to put on the record what they have done for Australians incarcerated in foreign locales...tall poppy syndrome perhaps?
Who is Jock Palfreyman, darling ? what happened to him?? I'm all computer eyes darling tell me do ah! this getting a hot topic. FPSS what do they have to hide??
Anonymous...
If you really believe the tripe that you are espousing here why don't you put your name to it, a name that I can confirm?
You think that from the relative safety of anonymity you can run an argument. It is hardly worth arguing with someone who does not have the courage of their convictions to argue under their own name.
Once again, you have not clarified anything. The term being bandied about is that Schapelle is insane. The local doctors in Indonesia say she is depressed and that she has been prescribed medication, where is the problem on this point?
I am not telling you where I derive my income from and no one else who posts here should have to either. Perhaps, I should make a hard and fast rule that entry to the site requires a verifiable name. Still wanna play?
Yes, you seem like you are hard person to fool.
Sad doesn't start to describe it really. Mr Baiton as bought the Kay Danes front like so many others.
Do the Corby family want her on the case, or commenting on it? No. So why is she doing it?
Irene, or whatever your real name is, first you sing for the FPSS and then you make disgusting allegations about the Corby family again. You really care about foreign prisoners don't you.
To the Stephen case person, if you ask at a few Schapelle Corby sites someone will tell you how to contact the family.
Anonymous...
You seem to know a lot of facts that no one would seemingly be able to verify because you do not have the courage to post under your own name.
I am sure that you have many reasons for this. All the same, it sort of devalues any claims that you make about knowing certain facts.
Daffney...
Why don't you give us your spin on things?
So we are back to square one... so some misguided, so called Schapelle Supporters from the FreeSchapelle Forum are trying to undermine FPSS.
I know I sound like a broken record.. but how does this help Schapelle again?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
For the record My Baiton I have screen captured this page and I am sending it to Steve now. Do you buy everything you are told?
Anonymous...
I have not bought anything. If you go back and read the comments then this would be painfully obvious to you.
However, it seems that you are caught up in your own little fantasy where responsibility, accountability, and transparency mean nothing to you.
You do not even have the courage to post under your real name.
Personal attacks... well what can i say.... sticks and stones... may break my bones.....
If you want to email me privately then I will forward your email to Stephen Sutton and to Jock's father as well if you require. I'm sure they would be grateful for some tangible support.
Thank you Anonymous. I will contact a couple of websites and find a way to contact them.
Kay....
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz indeed.
Anonymous...
Why bother screen capturing it? Couldn't you just drop him a line to let him know that his name has come up?
In any event, I believe that he has already been here and had a bit of a read previously, in fact he might even be here now, there are a lot of anonymous posters coming online.
Do I believe everything I am told? No, I have been told pretty consistently on this thread that Schapelle Corby is innocent, and I do not believe that.
However, I might add, if you took the time to read all of my responses on this thread and the other posts about the young woman, then you will see that compassion and guilt do not need to occupy the same sentence.
I can believe her to be guilty while simultaneously believing that there needs to be compassion extended. I believe she is depressed, maybe even clinically depressed. I believe that depression is a serious mental illness that cannot be treated with a "she'll be right" or a "snap out of it".
Schapelle Corby needs to be treated. I think this can be done in Bali. However, if the assessment by her local doctors is for repatriation to Australia, then I would be in support of that as well.
It is high time, you and the other anonymous posters tried to address the opinions of others as they are and not as you would hope them to be.
This whole issue has come about because in your supposed passion for the support of the Schapelle Corby cause you have lost sight of what is important, Schapelle, and are too busy stoking your own egos and looking to settle perceived old scores with others.
I, too, would ask, "how does this help Schapelle?"
My spin on things would make your head do 360 darling. As for names, is that really Kay Danes? are you really Rob darling is Gaile Gaile anyone can enter any name darling and be anyone. Funny yes??
However, it seems that you are caught up in your own little fantasy where responsibility, accountability, and transparency mean nothing to you.
That would be completely the opposite as I have come belatedly into this blog.
Some people have directed me to it.
For the reason that there seemed to be some mis-direction for wont of a better word. Dunno.
And was advised not to use my name.
So I am a by-stander. Albeit not without knowledge.
Dear Anonymous,
Thank you for making me laugh regarding the accusation that Irene isn't my real name. I needed that.
You seem to be quite the humanitarian yourself as you are so quick to put down others, yet preach compassion for Schapelle. Thank you for your valuable input.
Would you please elaborate on which 'disgusting allegation' I made? (again?)
I have made no reference to anything specific other than what was aired on TV and still that was relatively vague.
Will the real Anonymous stand up!
Daffney...
All talk Darling. You could not make my head spin 360 degrees even if you were the Prime Minister of Australia or the President of Indonesia himself.
Yes, one can pretend to be anything that they want under the moniker of anonymous or a pen name. However, as I have said before, if you are interested in whether I am real a short internet search would reveal the truth on that one.
For those of you wanting to put in writing that I am financially profiting from Schapelle Corby through media etc.., as has been stated in less courageous terms both here and in the freeschapelle forum, please feel free to post this here, along with your real name and a postal address. I will then be more than happy to meet you and your lawyer in a court... and prove you absolutely wrong, malicious and defamatory against my good name. Then I'll be more than happy to use those funds to pay for the mental health care that Schapelle Corby needs.
Anonymous...
If this is really true, then heed the advice from the blog owner, me, and adopt a pen name so that I can distinguish you from the other anonymous posters.
Mis-direction of what?
Do elaborate.
It seems that most of the anonymous posters here have "knowledge". So, there is nothing new in that one.
Irene...
Good luck!
Kay...
They are, and quite possibly they are all in the same room and in front of the same computer!
Anonymous...
Why not?
Why not adopt a pen name so that you can be distinguished from the other anonymous posters and avoid being labeled with the same brush?
Just a thought.
What a very courageous comment to make. I commend you.
Anonymous...
Whichever one chooses to stand up. It would seem that the challenge has been laid out before you on this one.
I think the Robin Tampoe is getting more comments than it or he deserves.
However, the majority of this is water off a duck's back if you cannot put your real name to your assertions and comments.
This was the point about responsibility, accountability, and transparency. Those of you here commenting as anonymous seem intent on slandering others, I wonder how your comments contribute to helping Schapelle or her family?
But, for the vast majority of you commenting here it would seem that the interests of Schapelle Corby are the furthest things from your minds.
Yes, very sad.
By the way, I thought Morpheus over at the freeschapelle forum had mandated that this thread be allowed to die? I guess those of you claiming to be Schapelle supporters have not heeded his advice.
Oh well.
Irene? If you say so.
Disgusting allegation? You know exactly how it works. The lie is launched, you get it quoted in the media, and then you refer back to it all over the place to try to spread it.
Kay Danes. You seem to think everyone is stupid. Why not just do what the prisoner's family want?
They don't want you tagging on to Schapelle's misery and at the same time using that to throw mud at Mercedes.
Are there no other prisoners you can go and bother? No other families you can chase around with your so helpful comments?
The FPSS services are not wanted. So why are you still around?
I think part of the problem here is that these so called supporters have been telling Mercedes that I have been slagging off at her, when I haven't... so they are trying to force me to say something bad about her, which I won't, so in their sick minds, it justifies them saying that I'm saying what they're saying... which I'm not.
Kay
That is EXACTLY what you have been doing.
Slagging off Mercedes.
Your words. Not ours. And we know how and why you did it.
For a long time now. And now you found this new 'medium'.
Repeat last post.
Kay Danes. Why not read your own words here and in so many other places? You have more shopfront Myers.
Anonymous...
You seem like you do not want to add anything to the conversation that is constructive.
Should I be thinking about deleting you?
If you want to continue posting, then have the courage to use your real name.
Better still, why not if you are so close to Mercedes, inform her of this discussion and get her to comment on the role, or lack thereof, of FPSS?
Otherwise, anything you have to say is really irrelevant because you are slandering from behind a veil of supposed anonymity.
I am guessing you were in favour of the Alexander Downer home invasion?
Kay...
It seems that sensible and civil discussion is not the order of the evening this evening.
Anonymous,
I'll ask again, what allegation have I made? I am not sure what you are talking about. Please elaborate. You, or one of you, asked for transparency on one side while I wanted transparency on all. It appears you may be reading too much into what I've typed making something out of nothing?
Anonymous said, "Disgusting allegation? You know exactly how it works. The lie is launched, you get it quoted in the media, and then you refer back to it all over the place to try to spread it."
Rob Baiton. Larry said you were being played like a piano or something like that. I can see what he meant.
Irene...
Seems to be a waste of time, don't you think?
Anonymous...
My money would be on you being Larry, and Morpheus, and Daffney, and Steve Addison.
Not that it matters any.
The only person being played here is you. So, in essence, you are playing [with] yourself.
But, I have got to say, for a group of supporters that were going to let this Tampoe thread die, you have certainly expended considerable effort in keeping it alive.
The question that has been posed here a number of times is how does any of this help Schapelle?
I fail how to see the continually slandering of others serves to see Schapelle get treatment, I fail to see how it helps Schapelle be transferred to a better facility, I fail how it sees Schapelle brought home to Australia.
You really are a funny bunch of supporters. You seem to be supporting yourselves and not Schapelle.
Oops, I forgot, I am being played like a piano, so I am guessing that means I just do not see the big picture, right?
Enjoy the rest of your evening.
I don't know why you feel compelled to attack me personally. It certainly sounds as if you are fixated which is kind of creepy.
In any case, as I have said a hundred times already, Mercedes has the right to make her own choices and I have reiterated this to her in private correspondence and to those of you here, who are making a public issue of this.
I do not always agree with some of her strategies however, as I have said previously to her, and in this blog, that is her right to make whatever choice she wants to make. After all, she is the one who has sacrificed much, to be there to take care of Schapelle on a daily basis.
As for the rest of your comments, it is common for the media to seek out people for comment, when there is something newsworthy happening with the Corbys.. as is the case of the five year anniversary of Schapelle's arrest. They have several options when this happens: they can contact Jodie Power, Ron Bakir, Robin Tampoe, Tim Lindsay, Tony Wilson, Paul Wilson, and since I am well known in the prison advocacy field and have experienced both depression and unlawful detainment, Kay Danes.
I have always commented as appropriately as I am able, in support of Schapelle. It may be that my comments are not 100% what supporters want to hear, but it is in keeping with not provoking Indonesia or the Australian Government, or making any inflammatory remarks that would be detrimental to Schapelle's plight.
Schapelle does not have too many people in her corner, who have a media profile. I am very mindful of the fact that I do not speak for her, but I remember her as a young frightened woman, about to go to face an uncertain fate. If I am to be attacked for caring about her, then so be it. If I am asked by media what it feels like to be detained and to be uncertain about the future, and if my comments can help them understand a little about what Schapelle might be feeling as a prisoner, then I cannot see the harm in humanizing her in that way. I would much prefer to do this, than for them to contact people who are more than willing to "tell a story" for money, regardless of how that impacts on Schapelle.
My bet is that Kay Danes is, whatever, Mr Piano.
A lawyer should also know better than to make allegations based upon what he is told by on eof the antagonists. I have sent another screen capture off.
You can play your own tune now because I am off to bed.
Anonymous...
Mate, take and send as many screen captures as you want.
My questions of you have always been geared to getting you to illuminate the situation. There is nothing in any of my comments that evidences taking of any side, but my own.
But, I am guessing that none of that matters.
As I said, enjoy the rest of your evening.
Dear All...
I have enabled comment moderation.
All comments that are defamatory of anyone are going to be ignored and deleted at my discretion.
If you are serious about advancing the debate on this issue, then be civil.
I'm littleozzybloke...g'day all..
Well, isn't this an interesting little bloggy thing..Few heads about...hello gaile..your everywhere hey...good ole desert...ever faithful..miss danes fpss..others doubling on on the anons..
I've only popped in as word drifted about and landed my way with a mention here of the Sutton case, Some may know who i am and what my position on this case was, My fbd discussion forum managed the Support of this case with kay danes and fpss.
I am a close friend of Ann Cluse and Stephen, and I respectfully request on behalf of that family that all interest in the Sutton case to be dropped, Ann is not a well lady who fought a mighty battle for the release of her brother, It has taken it's toll..
As to the conflicts that seem to involve miss danes and her fpss, look people, we all do the best and what we think is right for others, most issues are caused by miscommunication and unreliable sources and those out to be negative as a way of life, there are many of them...
Miss danes and the fpss should be commended for what they do, let alone all the work with no thanks that goes on behind the front page.
If anyone wishes to get in touch with me..you'll find me..take care all
Everyone have a nice day now..
fairbloodydinkum..
From reading these posts Rob I can only come up with two possible thoughts.
1) You have an alterior motive
2) You fight so hard for others who are judged (like Schapelle) yet you constantly judge yourself.
Why would FPSS knock back media exposure?
Rob,
How bout you take out your views on the case as well as others saying one way or the other and use the term 'wrongful conviction'. This is a fact and it won't compromise your own thoughts. That would not be allowed in Australia.
I'm curious to know why a 'lawyer' would be putting a blog on the internet. Firstly, you're not getting paid for it. Secondly, you keep making it personal rather then viewing at it through how it would go through the courts in a country like Australia?
You seem to feel you have to put your opinion down, which seems very unprofessional. I'm guessing you think Schapelle was wanting to do a domestic trade? I don't go along with this. However, from that perspective, why wouldn't she just put the stuff on a truck from Brisbane to Sydney??
Anonymous...
I still see that you are opting to not have the courage of your convictions when posting.
I am happy to let comments that are critical or defamatory of me through and respond to them.
It seems to me that the people with ethical and moral issues here are those who seek to defame and slander other commenters to this blog from the relative safety of anonymity or a pen name.
So, let's get to it!
Wrongful conviction? How so? She was convicted in an Indonesian court of law pursuant to Indonesian standards. Schapelle Corby did not commit her crime in Australia, she committed it in Indonesia. Quite simply, she was subject to their law and their procedures.
The anonymous supporters of Ms. Corby who have made their presence felt here harp on an Australian standard, and that the trial was a show trial and a big conspiracy that Australia was complicit in. Yet, for the many hundreds of comments that have been made on this thread, there is no evidence presented other than; go out and do the research yourself, it is all there.
Sounds to me like the conspiracy theory is nothing more than speculation and conjecture with a little bit of circumstantial fear-mongering thrown in for good measure.
As to lawyers blogging. Wake up!
There is not ethical or moral reason why a lawyer cannot maintain a blog. There are many thousands of them.
Second, this is not a Schapelle Corby blog. Posts about her case make up a very insignificant percentage of the total posts here.
Third, I am not involved in the case. So, I am not ethically bound to keep any privileged information or data.
Fourth, I do not know the Corbys, the prosecution, the defense, or the judges. I am merely commenting and voicing an opinion.
Your problem with this is I am voicing an opinion counter to yours and as such you want to silence it. You cannot argue with me on the substance so you seek to play the subterfuge game by questioning credibility, skills, morals, ethics, or humanitarian ideals as a means of diverting attention from the lack of substance of your own arguments.
Fourth, not everything in this world is about getting paid. I have worked in a voluntary capacity on a great many things. Once again, it seems that when it comes to Schapelle Corby everyone is in it for the dollars, at least according to her supporters.
Fifth how would it go in courts in Australia is irrelevant. Why is this so hard for you to understand? The crime was not committed here. The best you might do is to compare what sort of sentence she might have received here for a similar conviction.
My guess would be somewhere between 2 - 4 years. She certainly would not have received a 20-year sentence in Australia as a first time offender.
But, that really is not the point, is it?
Sixth, why can't I put my opinion down in writing? People are doing just that all over the place, and on the internet. Hey, aren't you doing that right now? Don't people do this on forums supportive of Ms. Corby and her family?
Your argument just does not hold water on isn't it unprofessional?
Nope, no views on whether the girl was trying to do a domestic trade. Yep, more speculation and conjecture in an attempt to muddy the waters.
But, feel free to return and personalize it. I am sure you can come up with something better that innuendo and insinuation about my credibility or ethics.
Have a nice day whoever you are.
Littleozzybloke (AKA LOB)...
I am using comment moderation. And, have been tossing up whether to publish this comment. I have decided to publish because I swung by the forum and checked it out.
And, it would seem that you have first hand knowledge of a particular case that has become a contentious one here. Also, the request for further discussion on this particular case is reasonable in light of the illness of one of the central people in that case.
Thanks for dropping by and leaving a comment. Comments are always appreciated, especially when they are civil and respectful.
Onya!
I have been a supporter at the main Australian Schapelle forum for the past couple of years.
There is a lot of sensible advice on this blog. Personally, I agree with people like Irene. I agree with Kay Danes on most things - not all - mainly because I'm trying to be optimistic.
Personally, I can't see the purpose of endlessly rehashing the guilt/innocence debate.
Like I said earlier, what matters is her health and getting her back to Australia.
The governments are never going to admit that they did anything wrong.
Rob: Have you joined the supporters forum? You should. I don't think it matters if you have doubts about her innocence.
Crazy Canuck
The case was never settled one way or the other. You have the view that when someone is convicted that they must be guilty... What law school did you go to? Are you disbarred? Why the sympathy for Robin Tampoe. I won't comment on him, I don't know him. Do you??
Do you honestly think that someone would want to export supplies to a third world country where they will gain a tenth the price that they would in Australia??? hmmm. Again, what law school is this??
You always see the glass half empty Rob. Chin up. Peace be with you...
Crazy Canuck...
Pretty much what this thread has been about, when it has not been verbally attacking other commenters about their credentials, skils, or intelligence, is whether there is any value in rehashing the arguments on the evidence.
Quite simply, no matter how often it is done, the Indonesians are not going to throw their hands up in the air and say, "yes, you are right, our courts are corrupt and third world and worth nothing. Schapelle is free to go."
However, if there is a case to be made it is for some degree of compassion so that the young woman can deal with her mental health issues. The Indonesians, despite what has been said here, are a compassionate people who value life.
I agree, at this point in time, getting either government to stand up and say mistakes were made is not going to happen, no matter how many home invasions take place.
No, I have not joined any forums. Having "supporters" verbally attack you, threaten you, and engage in nothing that resembles argument, has left me feeling that there are other people who might be more accepting of any help that I can offer in terms of support. Because clearly there are already enough supporters of Schapelle Corby, if those people calling themselves supporters can afford to waste time deriding and denigrating others.
Thanks for dropping by and commenting again.
Anonymous...
I was going to stop posting comments from anonymous commenters. Primarily, because just about all of you have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion about how to best move forward.
However, I sometimes cannot help myself when comments like yours come along. Firstly, because it highlights your lack of knowledge of the situation, it highlights you have not done your homework in terms of reading all the comments or the original post, and you link the law school that I went to with the price of wacky weed in Bali and the rest of Indonesia.
Seeing I am being civil I will refrain from calling your post what it is.
But to the substantive issues.
What do you mean the case was never settled? It perhaps has never been settled the way you want it to have been settled. But, as far as I recall, Schapelle Corby has exhausted all of her local causes or action from trial to appeal to review.
The only remaining avenue is to seek clemency or pardon from the president of the Republic of Indonesia.
On convictions and guilt. It might serve you well to go back and read the posts and comments. I have never equated a conviction with guilt or guilt with a conviction.
I think and believe that she is guilty because she did it. I also believe that under the Indonesian system her conviction was valid. That is all I have ever said.
I have also said that I am open minded enough that if someone could present evidence other than circumstantial beliefs, speculation, and some conjecture, which proved her innocence them I would be happy to admit my error.
I am a little bit confused about the comment that I have sympathy for Robin Tampoe. You really do need to go back and read the original post and the subsequent comments. But, if you cannot be bothered, then here it is in a nutshell.
The original post is about Mr. Tampoe being struck of the Role of Legal Practitioners. I have no sympathy for the man whatsoever. My personal view is that he saw an opportunity to make a few dollars and found himself in a situation where he was way out of his depth.
Sympathy for Robin Tampoe, no.
It does not matter what I think about the price of tea in China or the price of dope in Bali. Schapelle Corby arrived at the airport in Denpasar, opened her bag, said the boogie board bag was hers, admitted she knew that it was marijuana, and claimed she did not know how it got there. The court did not believe her claim that she knew nothing about it.
This has no relevance to where I studied law.
Have a nice day.
Anonymous...
I do not know whether you are the same anonymous as the previous one I just responded to, but it matters not.
I just find it amusing that none of these anonymous posters have the courage of their convictions to post under their real names.
I wonder, and I am wondering aloud here, does one post anonymously because you are afraid? or is it because you are embarrassed? or are you ashamed?
No, you do not know me and there is no need for you to feel you can patronize me.
How I see the glass is irrelevant to this thread.
Chin up? I wouldn't be dead for quids.
You?
Hi Rob,
I thought it best to clarify one point, since it has become a topic of discussion elsewhere. Although I thought it went without saying, that the defamatory comments posted by "some" Freeschapelle Forum members on this blog, may not necessarily represent the views of everyone on that forum. As confirmation, I have today been informed that the said forum owner has stated: "What is being posted is not the opinion of this forum and the posters do not have my support."
Good to hear, although to clarify, I have never said otherwise. Nor have I intentionally attempted to undermine that forum. I think certain individuals have done that themselves.
Some people may think they are very clever masking IP's and posting slanderous remarks as anonymous but the Australian Police are far more clever I'm sure.
Anonymous....
It is a little silly to keep posting as anonymous seeing there are so many of you. It is a real treat to try and connect the dots to work out who is who.
But thanks to technology and the ability to trace IPs I am slowly but surely connecting those dots.
This is a response to the "two possible thoughts" comment.
It is obvious you have not read all the posts or all my comments.
1. Wrong.
2. Wrong. I am not judging myself in any of these posts. As I have said, I wouldn't be dead for quids!
There is no need to respond to the FPSS question. It has been answered elsewhere and in detail. It seems that when you have a chip on your shoulder about something then no manner or amount of explanation will do.
To be sure this is a post about Robin Tampoe which has degenerated into an attempt by some to hijack the post and make it a personal attack against the blog owner and one particular commenter.
This is not a post about Kay Danes nor is it a post about FPSS. Any future comments about either will be ignored and left in comment limbo (along with a number of others that are already there).
If you want to criticize me and defame and slander me or question my skills, qualifications, experience, or anything else, ten go for it. I think I am up to it.
However, I will not allow this blog or this post to be a launching pad for personal attacks on others. I am more than happy to argue the point on this one. But, rest assured, no comments attacking others will make it through.
Enjoy your day!
Kay...
I honestly believe that there are supporters of Schapelle Corby who are more interested in getting her home than settling old scores and belittling and working overtime on the derision of others who want to support but are unconvinced with respect to guilt or innocence.
I do not think that I have ever said that the views that have been expressed here represent the members of the free schapelle forum, this is clearly not the case. Some members of that particular forum have posted to this thread in ways that suggest they are keen to engage as many people as they can in dialogue.
There are others who are also clearly form that forum who have shown that they are not prepared to engage in dialogue unless one adopts the position that they believe in.
I am glad that Nev has come out and said that the views here are not representative of all members of the Free Schapelle forum. I think that is important.
On the IP front it is true. Some people are not as smart as they seem (and there are always those who are smarter somewhere) or do not have the tech savvy skills to mask their identities as well as they might think they have.
There was a case in NY recently where Google was forced to give up the identity of an anonymous poster. I am not anonymous, but as a law abiding citizen I would have to comply with a court order.
Rob
Why don't you simply take away the option of Anonymous posters?
Gaile...
I could have chosen that route. However, I appreciate that there are people in parts of this world, and even in Australia, who feel the need to be anonymous.
Should I also ban all pen names as well? Should I make it a condition of posting comments to this blog that you must allow me to verify your true identity before posting?
Or better still I could set it so only those that become members can access the blog, this way I could guarantee that only those that agree with me and who are willing to stroke my ego would be able to comment. Everyone else could be hounded and harassed until they fell into line or I could denigrate and mock them until they gave up.
Comment moderation is a better option at this point in time.
In any event, I read somewhere in the blogosphere that having multiple pseudonyms and being able to post anonymously allows you to project positivity in all manner of places. I am assuming, these multiple pseudonyms and anonymous characters allow you to project a great deal of negativity as well.
Hope this clears it up.
Rob. If you took the option of anon away (because it is so easy as you currently have it)then most would probably adopt a pen-name, although there is no reason why someone should use that anon option anyway. But you would not have so many.
I have an idea who one of your anons may be - not from Schapelle forum - just a guess - and having that anon option would have been ideal for him, for example. He's a real trouble-maker. Very contentious. Especially on anything to do with Schapelle.
Anyway it would minimise the problems you have had. Just a thought.
On many forums I have seen that even if using a penname people still say what they want anyway.
Just my two-penneth worth.
Gaile...
This is my point. Even if some of these anonymous posters adopted a pen name they could and would still post the drivel that they have posted up to now.
The Daffney's, the Larry Ho's, and the like have adopted pen names and still feel this affords them the necessary anonymity to defame, slander, and deride at will.
Hence, should I also ban pen names? Or should I require that all people who want to post a comment provide a phone number and an address where I can confirm their respective real identity before allowing them to post under a pen name?
I think not.
With comment moderation I have the discretion to filter out those comments that do not endeavour to contribute to the discourse but only set out to defame individuals who might not see things in the same way as they do.
HI Rob,
Another allegation made that I and others are feathering our own nest at Schapelle's expense is about to be defuncted.
Who Magazine are printing a statement in tomorrow's edition that discounts this ludicrous allegation which I might add stems from those cowardly posters from ... shall we simply say 'elsewhere'.
I have no wish to be lumped in together with those who have shamelessly profited from Schapelle's plight!
OK - it was just a thought.
Most forums have comment moderation.
But I still think that your anon is 'too easy'.
Your blog. So whatever you think.
Kay...
Good to hear.
Although, I somehow think that the majority of the anonymous posters that have turned up here in order to promulgate their drivel only listen, read, and write the things that they want to hear, read, and write.
There is no objectivity and there is no room for discussion, unless of course you agree with them, and then all is OK.
In any event, it is likely to be passed off as some new, or broader than was imagined, conspiracy by the press to attack the Corby family.
As I said, drivel.
Gaile...
Thanks for the thought!
I have explained why I have opted to do what I have. And why other options were considered and ultimately rejected.
This is a blog, it is not a forum where one must register, under some real or make-believe identity.
But, you are right! It is my blog and I get to make the rules. I have made the rules despite having to moderate comments being a pain in the arse, it is better than having cowards hiding behind the veil of anonymity trying to hijack this blog for their own purposes.
Enjoy the rest of your day!
Rob,
Back to Tampoe.... I remember when Schapelle was first arrested and the Robin Tampoe offer came up. There were quite a few 'experts' coming forward to offer 'support' ... not control. Of these were notable QC's, human rights lawyers, academics etc.. and these offers were made directly to Tampoe and then later, when it was clear that they were fumbling in the dark, to Mercedes. So many of us have watched this case knowing that nothing we could do could change anything unless we were 'tasked' to do something, which we weren't. Or tasked when it suited.
I just wish that time could be turned back and perhaps in hindsight, Mr. Tampoe might have engaged those who were more greatly experienced in such matters. It was an absolute given that Schapelle was going to get hit hard (20 yrs) if the approach was not anything other than conciliatory. Infact I mentioned this to her the day before the verdict. Everyone was telling her she was going home and I didn't want her to be shattered because it was as plain as the nose on your face she was going to get at least 15 years. I said as much. She didn't want to hear it and all these times since, she's been told over and over you're going home. And she doesn't. I guess people want to be optimistic. Tampoe looked pretty shattered when the verdict came in. Perhaps he was thinking about all those who tried to tell him.. who knows.
Bottom line is that no one likes to see another human being suffer, especially to suffer so unnecessarily. I really feel that Schapelle has been cheated but not necessarily by the Government or by those of us who could have advised appropriately had we been able to, and knowing what outcomes we have secured in other cases, working collectively ... supporting each other's strategies, and discreetly behind the scenes.
I think Phill said it very well on his previous post.... we all do the best we can. Some lessons are harder to learn than others. Some people find it difficult to comprehend how these things can be 'so'. It's the sad reality I guess.
So, you think everyone who gets on the stand in court tells the truth? I think you would be better as a journalist then a lawyer... Or, even a gossip magazine writer/columnist. You have a gift with making up stories Rob. Not everyone does.
Kay...
All I have ever said was that the family and those who came on board at the very start in terms of legal representation were out of their depth.
For this I have drawn the ire of many. I can take that on the chin, no dramas at all.
The unfortunate part is that collectively you cannot go back and start again. I am sure things would have played out differently, but that is the beauty of hindsight, I guess.
Have you ever heard of 'notice of alibi'? This can often assist acquittals. Schapelle was not given that opportunity. You can't make a judgement on her case on the following information:
1) You did not attend the trial
2) You have never spoken to the defendent (Schapelle) and from the sounds of it her family
3) You keep saying you're a lawyer without backing it up with examples.
If you are going to accuse someone of something, you can say that when you were on defence team for a criminal trial or DPP etc... We don't see any of this?
Anonymous...
I have got to say, this is and seems like it will continue to be fun.
You sticking to your guns and hiding behind the veil of the moniker "anonymous" while I continue to entertain your delusions.
I do not recall on this thread or any others where I said anything about people getting up on the witness stand and telling the truth 100% of the time.
I think what I might have said, if my memory serves me well, is that when the customs officers and police testified the court considered their testimony credible enough that it decided not to ask for or view any CCTV footage.
That, my friend, is a long way from arguing that every piece of testimony offered in court by a witness is 100% the truth. As a matter of fat I did not even say that the customs officers or the police were telling the truth.
I made a statement of fact, namely: the court accepted their version of events. Is that fair or just or something else can be debated until you are blue in the face.
Oh, should I feel suitably chastised that I have a gift for making up stories? What story have I made up? The one about Schapelle Corby being guilty and languishing in Kerobokan prison suffering from what is reportedly an extreme mental illness? What part of that story is not true? The part about the mental illness?
You are right though. Not everyone makes up stories. But, you were also right about the witness stand and by default defendants. Not all defendants when they are facing a long stint in jail believe that the best option for them is to tell the truth and to be honest about it by admitting their involvement.
On that front, you win some and you lose some. Some guilty people get off and some innocent people go to jail. But, by and large the system general works in favour of the guilty going to jail and the innocent going free. Take that as you will.
Mate, wake up and smell the coffee. This post is about Robin Tampoe. The thread has degenerated into a one-sided slanging match aimed at criticizing anyone who supports a Schapelle Corby release for treatment agenda but refuses to be drawn on her guilt or innocence.
You are starting to sound like a broken record. It is getting boring.
If you have something constructive to contribute to the discussion other than "Rob, you must really suck as a lawyer" or "Rob, you would make a good journalist or gossip columnist", then feel free to stop by again.
If not, then save yourself the trouble of commenting because there is just no need for me to continue to publish your non-contributions.
Cheers + have a nice day!
Anonymous...
I should thank you, I think. You are going to extreme lengths to prove my point.
You really should not be calling yourself a Schapelle Corby supporter and tarnishing the name of legitimate and real supporters of the young woman.
For the umpteenth time, this case is no longer about the evidence.
The Indonesians are not going to throw up their collective hands and say, "oh, you have caught us out!" "Therefore, Schapelle is free to go with our thanks for being such a good sport, of course!"
The notice of alibi is an interesting point. Was Schapelle going to present alibi witnesses from the time she packed the boogie board bag at home until she unzipped it in Denpasar?
Based on your last post and my response. Not all defendants tell the truth and not all alibis tell the truth. So, how much credence should we give to the alibi evidence that you claim is available or could have been presented but was not?
No, my friend, I can make a judgment on the trial of Schapelle Corby based on the decision handed down by the court combined with all the other information in the public record. So, therefore:
1. Makes no difference whether I was physically at the trial or not.
2. I do not need to speak to Schapelle or her family, do I? Are they going to tell me that she did it? I think not! Therefore, speaking to them I would be correct in assuming that I would hear that she did not do it and a rehashing of all the evidentiary issues made in this thread, right?
3. What examples would you like? More importantly, is there a need? I am posting under my real name and you are anonymous.
You keep telling me what I can and cannot do, yet you do not have the courage to post under your own name. I am more than happy to provide examples when you are happy enough to come out from under the cover of darkness and reveal your true self. That way we can have a real ding dong knock 'em out battle over the substantive issues of this case.
Until then...have a nice day.
Are you still practicing? It's not what you say here, it's what you don't... Before you form an opinion maybe have a chat to Paul Wilson (criminologist). I guess you rock up to court wondering what everyone's done, when in Western law right from the selection of jury a presumption of innocence must be undertaken.
What type of cases have you taken on? Have you ever been on a defence team? My guess is you've done more cases in third world countries then Australia?
By the way, have you ever read My story and/or Tony Wilson's book?
Correct me if I'm wrong but 'notice of alibi' is a process applied in common law "Commonwealth jurisdictions" and not civil law jurisdictions like Indonesia.
Anonymous...
I just cannot resist the temptation to keep publishing you and giving you your little forum for 15 seconds of fame.
Am I still practicing? No need to answer that is there? I am not probing you for what you do for a crust. I cannot even get you to post under your real name.
Suffice to say I was not involved in representing or providing any advice to Schapelle or her family. This goes for initially at the time of her arrest, through her trial, the appeals, and now.
What don't I say here? Please, be specific or explicit as to what you mean? I am not all that good with your cryptic messages.
I have formed an opinion. Although, that should not be construed as me being closed to other possibilities. If someone could provide evidence that Schapelle is innocent, then I would be happy to admit the error of my ways.
Evidence here is not cryptic allusions to alleged facts, conjecture or possibilities.
Why would I want to have a talk to Paul Wilson? What is it that you expect him to say to me? Is he going to tell me about the presumption of innocence?
Are you trotting out the old line that Indonesia does not recognize a presumption of innocence? Should I now believe all your arguments because you have now "got me" with a notice of alibi argument and the presumption of innocence?
Oh dear.
Perhaps you have never learned that to assume can get you in trouble. So, perhaps, you would be better served not making quite so many assumptions about how I attend court.
Do you want my CV? How a bout a trade? Your real name for my CV, interested? Then you will be able to see what I have and have not done. Suffice to say I have been involved in a few cases here and there.
Didn't think so.
What difference does it make? Are you suggesting because one reads a book that they will automatically be convinced of Schapelle's innocence?
As I said, keep 'em coming, the posts that is, because you seem so much more focused on discrediting me than you do on "saving" Schapelle. Which is kind of sad considering the circumstances.
I am wondering what your beef is with me? I am wondering whether I know you, as your intent seems a little personal.
Not that it matters any.
Once again, see you soon, and enjoy your day!
Kay...
It seems that because Schapelle Corby is an Australian citizen caught with 4.1kgs of wacky weed in a foreign jurisdiction whose legal system is based on the Civil Law must be afforded the rights of a common law jury trial.
Anything short of this is a miscarriage of just and a travesty. Perhaps all foreigners caught in Australia committing crimes should not be subject to our laws but the laws of their country of origin?
If I am not mistaken, I did not attend the trial, the defense did try and introduce alibi evidence and came up with a couple of Qantas employees. I believe the idea was to show that the 4.1kgs could not have gone through unnoticed either at Brisbane or in Sydney.
However, these employees on the balance of "evidence" presented to the court and accepted by the court did not sway the judges into the not guilty column.
Rob, you are 100% correct. From what I saw of the final verdict and through following the trial process, the lawyers did attempt to apply common law to a civil law jurisdiction. Hence why they were deemed to fail. It's a fairly common mistake of lawyers who are not experienced in criminal law under a civil law jurisdiction and equally, most of the supporters are not familiar to any larger extent the civil law process. They are after all just ordinary people who leave most legal matters to their local lawyers. Understanding the difference between these two systems and not taking into account the other aspects such as culture and sovereignty etc... is hence why I believe supporters become misguided and confused. They attempt to wrap things up nicely in a common law package when in actual fact, the wrapping paper is completely unusable! No disrespect to them intended. They want to 'save Schapelle'... but realistically, they should be now focusing on how best to support her.
Hi Rob. Firstly I just wanted to clear up something if I may. Someone here said that Kay/FPSS appeared to want ‘control’ of the case. I can understand how this erroneous assumption blossomed this year.
However - Kay herself did not ask for that particular job this year, rather I pestered her into it. And I asked her to make her contacts and expertise available, which naturally she did, should they be wanted. I am a Schapelle supporter Rob, and as you would have noticed we are very persistent!
I have been convinced Schapelle was innocent since the first time I read her words describing what happened to her at Denpasar airport. But over the last 5 years I have evolved toward the unhappy yet pragmatic conclusion that sometimes innocence does not count. Sometimes justice does not happen. Sometimes survival becomes the highest goal.
And for Schapelle to survive, for Schapelle to find a way out, we must work within the rules of the machine she is trapped in. Rather than just stand here and yell at it. Any longer.
We should bury our anger at the system, our unhappiness at the past, and discard what hasn’t worked. We should re-examine this machine and our approach to it as if we were scientists. The machine isn't in Australia. So what makes the doors open? Who do we get on side with for that? And what would they have us do?
Kay...
My personal opinion, not that anyone cares or any one is listening, is simply that the time for discussing the evidence and the flaws in the trial are passed.
I believe that there are many legitimate supporters who are focused on issues more important, such as the treatment regime and location where this treatment should / must be provided.
Hindsight is always 20/20, perhaps if Schapelle and the family and her supporters at the time had realized how badly this might turn out, and ultimately did turn out, then things may have been done differently and different people may have been engaged to get the job done.
Nevertheless, it is the future that is paramount now and not the history.
I have been taking flak for mentioning the freeschapelle forum and some of its members form some of the members there.
I genuinely believe that on the whole the members of that forum do really care and are passionate about Schapelle Corby's best interests.
However, it is worth noting that this nothing of consequence post on Robin Tampoe has taken on a life of its own. Generally, my posts are lucky to generate 10 comments, there might be the odd one that gets 30 or 40, but they are few and far between.
The interest in this particular post arose, and the resultant tit for tat, after a link was posted on the freeschapelle forum. I tend to believe that there is a causal link there. However, I do not believe that the posters that make their way to this post from there are representative of the views of the moderator(s) of that forum.
I really do not feel that I should have to enable comment moderation, but it seems that some people just cannot be civil. It does not matter where they come from or really even who they are. It shows a real lack of courage of one's convictions to post defamatory and slanderous allegations anonymously.
Such is life.
Murray...
Thanks for the clarification.
Hi Rob,
I have posted previously and have now read every single post.
You say that you believe Schapelle is guilty as you believe that she actually did smuggle the drugs.
In Australia we work on the basis of "innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt". We all understand what 'innocent' and 'guilty' means. Its the 'reasonable doubt' that trips many people up, even the best lawyers. I do find it difficult to understand how a lawyer of your repute says "you haven't seen anything that proves her innocent". A good lawyer really wouldn't say that. A good lawyer would be looking for what casts reasonable doubt against the charges and accusations Schapelle faced. Sure there is doubt that she did it, but is there reasonable doubt?
I used to believe Schapelle was guilty, but changed my mind to "she's not getting a fair trial" when TV news footage showed the court officials handling the evidence without the evidence being thoroughly forensically examined. Whilst it may well be argued that Schapelle wore gloves, the question arises: what if a fingerprint of an unexplained third party existed? Doesn't Schapelle have the right to find out who that belongs too? And I have never heard that notion dismissed on the basis that it was an old vacuum sealable bag - what if it were new? Doesn't that raise the level of importance for that evidence to be collected by the police / prosecution?
What I am alluding to is that you are only basing your opinion as to Schapelle's guilt on what evidence was presented to the court. There was other evidence that was not collected and thus not presented to the court. One of the articles in the criminal code specifies that "The burden of proof shall not befall the accused". Thus it is up to the prosecution and police to collect all the necessary evidence. That ultimately means that if the accused requests evidence and it is not collected then the defendant’s case is weakened. Right? So for the police to increase their chance of winning a case, they need not co-operate with the defence.
I take it you are aware that 28 minutes before Schapelle's luggage was screened at Pier C at Sydney International terminal, a plane landed with 10 Kg of cocaine. This information has been obtained by a combination of FOI, newspaper articles and NSW Supreme Court documents. Furthermore the passenger whose case the cocaine was packed in, checked in 2 bags in South America, but upon arrival in Brisbane (via Sydney) both bags were missing. NSW Police attested in court that the cocaine was transported in one of the bags, was found empty in Rushcutter's Bay. So this begs the question: what was in the other bag and why did it go missing? Could it have contained an infamous 4.2 Kg of MJ to be found later that day in Bali?
This is not as silly as it sounds. Is there any proof that the MJ didn't come from South America? The answer is no, because the MJ was destroyed before it could be thoroughly tested.
No wonder Schapelle pleaded not guilty. She was blaming baggage handlers months before the cocaine syndicate's existence became public knowledge on May 10th 2005 - 17 days before her verdict.
If you are a good lawyer, or even a smart one at that, don't you think it pertinent that if the defendant is blaming baggage handlers that the police should obtain or investigate each and every person who touched the luggage in reverse direction (ie from Bali to Sydney to Brisbane) and establish if there was any foul play. You know as well as I do that if the Indonesian police did this (and it wasn't the role of Australian police to do this without a request from the Indonesians) they would encounter a bunch of baggage handlers that were smuggling drugs at the same time Schapelle was in transit.
But you and many others will dismiss this as "proof of innocence", and you will also dismiss this as "reasonable doubt".
Brad...
Did you post as Brad before? Or have you posted as anonymous or under a different pen name, like Larry Ho?
I really do hope that you are not in any way associated with the freeschapelle forum. If I am not mistaken the owner and moderators of that forum have said publicly that the comments on this post must stop, there are more important things that need to be done.
Not that it really matters one way or the other to be perfectly honest.
What I do find intriguing is how members of groups allegedly being in support of Schapelle go about spreading their positivity through anonymous comments, pen names, and other attempts at invisible-ness like using a real looking name that does not link to anywhere.
I guess whatever gets you going!
Onto some of the substantive assertions that you make.
I find it quite amusing that Schapelle supporters are forever alluding to my skills as a lawyer, and caching their arguments in a manner that says; if you do not agree with us then you must be a bad lawyer, or a crummy person, or whatever else finds its way onto the list.
I also find it amusing in a really sad way that you are telling me how the system works in Australia. Amusingly sad because unfortunately for Schapelle she did not find herself in an Australian jurisdiction, the Australian rules do not apply, the Indonesian ones do.
Indonesia is not a common law country, it is a civil law country. Indonesia does not use jury trials. Indonesia does have and use the presumption of innocence.
My question is this, when are you and Schapelle's supporters going to finally understand that this is not an Australian trial? Schapelle does not have the right to a jury trial, she does not have the right to have the rules of common law evidence applied to the "facts" as they are adduced in Indonesia.
Brad...(Part II)
No need to patronize me on the reasonable doubt front. I have not been tripped up on reasonable doubt. Although, I do find it funny that reasonable doubt for you is that the police have an obligation to investigate any theory that is put forward at trial.
If the police do not do this then the trial is a farce. Mate, my question would be then, why didn't Schapelle also blame God? Because the police might have had a bit of a hard time getting in touch with God in order for God to make a statement to police on the record.
The idea that the baggage handlers did it has been debunked. Tampoe, himself said he made it up. The police have investigated and said that they have no evidence. If I am not mistaken the police are part of a conspiracy so "we" would expect them to say that, wouldn't we?
Be specific on the articles that you refer to in the Criminal Code and then I will respond. The burden is not generally on the police to make the defense's case is it? Or are you suggesting that in Indonesia the police has the obligation to make the defense's case, and that in Australia the police also have a similar obligation to make the defense's case?
On the bags. You are clutching at straws. I understand that you must clutch at straws because there is nothing else left for you to work with other than a little bit of compassion from the Indonesians.
However, once again, maybe the bag is with God, perhaps we should ask around and find out. I do find it strange that one of the arguments for Schapelle not being guilty is, what idiot would take weed to Bali where it is a fifth of the price for what you would get for it in Australia?
Perhaps this, or a similar argument, is the argument we should use to look at the "other bag" theory.
Once again, the baggage handler alternative theory is a myth. It stands right along side the Aussie Gold myth. It is a nice try though.
Ultimately, though, you will have to come to understand that sooner or later the evidence game is up. Schapelle's appeals are done. Her only chance now is for leniency.
Rehashing the evidence is going to get you nowhere. The only evidence that might get you anywhere is new evidence that stands the test. New evidence is not some new theory, it is something which stands the test of scrutiny. This is where your theory about the baggage handlers falls over.
Yes, I dismiss the baggage handler angle as "proof of innocence". I also dismiss it as "reasonable doubt" because there was nothing to connect the baggage handlers to the weed whereas in contrast there was evidence connecting them to the cocaine.
But, Brad, keep plugging away, keep questioning my skills and my knowledge. It really is water off a duck's back. While you are wasting time on rehashing the evidence arguments, which I might add are going nowhere, Schapelle is continuing to struggle behind bars in Kerobokan prison.
I have better things to do, and I am sure that you do too. Then again, maybe you really do not care all that much for Schapelle or her freedom but rather you are more interested in trying to slander me in my own home.
Shame on you.
I think the real frustration for many supporters comes from not being able to find that loophole that sets her free. They believe in the ideal that justice will prevail.
Rob: That you care that Schapelle is suffering seems to have been lost in this discussion. There are plenty of people who feel the same as you. She really is in a terrible spot!
Rob.
This is truly getting laughable.
Indeed.
And yes. I have read comments here about you be 'played lke a piano'. I suppose that is a good anology.
On the other hand I have checked out your 'CV'. Impressive indeed. So now I will watch past and present comments. It certainly enlightened me as to how and why you have made comments here.
Swapping CV's as you suggested a few days ago was a good challenge. That is when I googled you.
Brad has been involved in forums since the beginning. He has also obtained FOI. Brad is one of the most analytical people I know. And way back in the post/s where people who denigrate Schapelle has 'debunked' such comments. How? With logic.
Slander Rob?
LOL. You honestly make me laugh.
I think the real frustration from Kay Danes is that she was not able to get her way
I can assure you I'm not frustrated in the least. Why should I be? I've never wanted to be in control of the Corby case, never stated I wanted to be, and certainly, Mercedes has never been given that impression. I've only ever given advice. Advice is free. It can be either accepted or rejected. Doesn't bother me one way or another. I have a pretty full life with lots to do and there are thousands of people out there who I support, and from whom I get support from too. :-)
Post a Comment