XPost: alt.drugs.busts, aus.legal, aus.politics   
   XPost: soc.culture.indonesia, soc.culture.malaysia, talk.politics.drugs   
   XPost: uk.politics.drugs   
   From: lincolnfs@hm.net   
      
   On Sat, 09 Jul 2005 02:57:42 GMT, "LDL"    
   wrote:   
      
   >"L Sternn"  wrote in message   
   >news:8mauc190l470nmfj3qiksf8hvd57frbf2v@4ax.com...   
   >> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 02:09:09 GMT, "LDL"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>"adchin"  wrote in message   
   >>>news:42cabce6$1_2@news.tm.net.my...   
   >>>> LDL wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> Then put me in the class of the not yet accused.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Now wouldn't this make a mockery of the Indonesian judicial system ?   
   >>>> What   
   >>>> happened to the third option, of people who are innocent ?  Say if   
   >>>> Indonesia has a population of 200 million, and you have 20 million   
   >>>> guilty,   
   >>>> the rest of the population is "not yet accused" then ?   
   >>>   
   >>>And just how many guilty parties have used this loophole.   
   >>>   
   >>>OJ Simpson, Greg Domosavich, Michael Jackson??, et al   
   >>   
   >> I personally think OJ did it but I honestly don't know if Michael   
   >> Jackson is guilty of anything other than being freakish and very rich.   
   >>   
   >> I don't know who Greg Domosavich is, and the only references Google   
   >> returns for it are 2 posts you've made to usenet.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>>Most innocent people can easily prove their case and those who didn't are   
   >>>just not smart enough.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> So instead of ""Liberty and Justice for all", you believe in Liberty   
   >> and Justice for anyone with a high enough IQ?   
   >   
   >I don't believe in letting criminals off the hook that easily.   
      
   You mean you don't believe in letting innocent people who are only   
   guilty of not being "smart enough" to get off the hook that easily.   
      
   By your logic, we should put you on death row.   
      
   >  Most people   
   >in society works hard to make a living without the legal thieves (the   
   >government through taxes) taking away their savings but to have other   
   >thieves and criminals taking away possessions of the innocents and commit   
   >horrendous crimes, I prefer harsh punishments to them.   
   >   
   >In retrospect of Schapelle Corby, her trial was made and her defence was   
   >shattered.  You and I will never really know if she is guilty or innocent by   
   >herself.   
      
   Which is precisely why she shouldn't have been sentenced to rot in   
   jail.   
      
      
   >The evidence brought before the court was quite fine.  It sounds   
   >like that you wish to listen to a voice of a buxom 27-year old female than   
   >take the evidence in itself.   
   >   
   >I had on many occasions brought the defence of the baggage labels against   
   >the weight (which is enough evidence to totally clear her name) but   
   >Schapelle's defence team never picked that up.  Unless Schapelle's defence   
   >team is totally stupid or is it that they are attempting to create a   
   >"reasonable doubt" case which is a common strategy of a criminal.   
   >   
   >I am asking you to refute that claim?   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)