Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Schapelle Corby - The ABC for the CMC . . .

The CMC needs to understand the situation they're in re Schapelle. It would be self preservation to act appropriately and speedily now, rather than wait until they have a bonfire beneath them, because most certainly, one is coming (metaphorical for any concrete thinkers out there).

To-day's debacle was not a good start. Hanging up on complainants when they're simply asking for a convenient time to call back is a disgrace, and grossly disrespectful, and grossly unprofessional.

Further, I'm now outlining this situation as simply as possible, because some people in high places need everything spelt out at pre-school level.

1. Schapelle had no criminal record.

2. Around $40,000 worth of marijuana was found in her bag when she arrived in Bali, in October 2004, after commencing her journey in Queensland (where she lived).

3. No Australian resident, before Schapelle, or since, has ever been convicted or caught taking kilos of marijuana from Australia, to Bali. Marijuana is worth about ten times more in Australia, than it is in Bali.

4. Schapelle did not materialise the marijuana out of thin air, and its physical existence is beyond dispute. Therefore someone grew this marijuana in Australia, and someone supplied this marijuana in Australia. These are both crimes in Australia.

5. No-one in Australia was ever convicted of growing this marijuana, or supplying it, despite the fact this was a major international incident, e.g. the first time any Australian had ever smuggled kilos of marijuana from Australia, to Bali, and at a staggering financial loss (given the price differential between the two countries).

6. It is beyond dispute that there should have been an Australian Police investigation into the Australian source of this marijuana, with Australian convictions flowing from that investigation.

7. However, if the Australian police knew full well that corrupt insiders were responsible for this bungled shipment, it would have acted as a strong disincentive to engage in a legitimate police investigation, because a legitimate police investigation may well have turned up the real culprits, and their police minders.

8. A legitimate police investigation into the production and supply of drugs uses multiple professional methods, and does (without doubt), include a professional search (and forensic investigation), of relevant premises. In Tony Wilson's book (pages 22 and 23), he unequivocally states that this police search did not occur.

9. No evidence was presented at Schapelle's trial in relation to her phone and banking records, and again, a forensic police investigation of these vital items are integral to any legitimate investigation into the production and supply of drugs.

10. Here are the further anomalies surrounding Schapelle's conviction, very simply explained for the CMC - and also graphically shown here, in this You Tube clip.

Summarising . . .
  • A woman with no criminal record is found with $40,000 worth of marijuana in her bag.
  • She is the first Australian ever to take kilos of marijuana from Australia, to Bali.
  • Every shred of physical evidence she begged for (and which she believed would clear her), is refused.
  • Australian Federal Police internal investigators clearly tell the press that the AFP are involved in using innocent passengers as drug mules between domestic airports.
  • There are no Australian convictions (ever), re the cultivation and supply of these drugs.
  • There is no Australian police investigation re the cultivation and supply of these drugs.
  • The same baggage handlers responsible for Schapelle's luggage later "Go down" on major drug smuggling charges.
  • The same cop responsible for overseeing those corrupt baggage handlers is now in prison, awaiting trial on major drug charges.
Is that simple enough for you CMC? Do you reckon there might be a case for someone to answer? I'll be calling you . . .