Sunday, May 30, 2010

Schapelle Corby - Courier Mail makes malicious & false accusations

This is David Fagan, current editor of The Courier Mail. Here is a vicious article in that newspaper of Monday 31st May 2010, which calls Schapelle a "Drug Smuggler," and mocks both Schapelle's pain, and the pain of her Mother.

So here's the missive I've just sent David . . .


I'm referring to your article here about Schapelle Corby. You refer to her as a "Drug smuggler." When referring to any person, there are many ways you could choose to describe them, such as "Australian," "Former Gold Coast resident," or "Former beauty student." These are just random examples off the top of my head. You could also choose to use no adjectives re Schapelle at all. However, when you deliberately choose to use "Drug Smuggler," you are also deliberately choosing to hi-lite certain facets and alleged "Facts."

You are (in effect), telling your readers about Schapelle's "Conviction" in a way that informs them (by omission of key points), that she was found "Guilty" through the due process of law, as understood by most Australians. It's a natural assumption to make. This is not correct. Schapelle's conviction was not lawful under either Australian or Indonesian law. Both jurisdictions require the presumption of innocence, and "Proof" of the charges laid. You will find many of those key facts thoroughly explained in this Sydney Morning Herald article (March 5th 2005).

Therefore, I am asking your publication to either formally (and publicly), retract it's use of the term "Drug smuggler" in relation to Schapelle, or to run an extensive article which fully describes and outlines the illegal nature of her conviction.

You may also wish to mention that the very senior policeman who was running a major "Drugs operation" at Sydney Airport (exact same time and terminal pertinent to Schapelle), is now in prison, awaiting trial on conspiring to import $120 million worth of drugs into this country, AND that the NSW Crime Commission (who employed that very senior policeman in the role of "Assistant Commissioner"), sold huge amounts of cocaine to the Australian public, at a very large profit. You could also report on the serious allegations of Ray Cooper, former Head of Operations, AFP Internal investigations, plus report the current complaints, re AFP/Queensland Police corruption (concerning Schapelle), that are now formally lodged with ACLEI (more info on that here too), The Commonwealth Ombudsman and The Queensland Parliamentary Crime & Misconduct Committee.

I look forward to your response on this matter, and I'll call your office tomorrow to confirm receipt of this correspondence.

If there is no satisfactory outcome (which corrects the public record), I will be lodging a formal complaint with The Media Alliance, in regard to the journalist who wrote the article. It is quite clear (in the very first point of their Code of Ethics), that the points I've outlined above are legitimate. More about that here.

So in summary, please be in no doubt that if there is no satisfactory outcome on this formal complaint to you by the end of this week, further complaints will be lodged with The Media Alliance ASAP, and formally followed up here, for the World to view (1st Google page, 2nd link down).

And you may also wish to take into account that this blog is a great deal more than one individual's words on a screen. It is a building body of formal evidence than can (and will), be taken to appropriate international bodies, re gross and continuing breaches of Schapelle's human rights. Australian media complicity in the corruption cover-up will be part of that far reaching report, and will also put other Australian outlets in the dock of Global opinion too.

And one more point David, Schapelle WILL have babies, but it won't be in that filthy, corrupt hell-hole - it will be back home here, in Australia, where she belongs.

Regards, Kim

Addit to the above, Monday 31st May 2010

Rang David Fagan's office around 3pm, and spoke to his secretary, a very pleasant and helpful woman (thank you). She confirmed that David had received the communication above. She was wasn't sure who wrote the article of to-day that I'm complaining about, but thought it was either Jasmine Lill, or Josh Robertson. I rang both journalists around 3.15pm, to find out one way or another, but both phones went straight through to voicemail. I left my name, phone number and details of the specific info I'm chasing, and asked them to call me back.

Anyway here are the further questions I wanted to put to David, and I look forward to his formal response (I told his secretary I had further questions, and I thought it would be more straight forward to put them in writing - she agreed):

1. Will The Courier Mail be publishing a formal apology for referring to Schapelle as a "Drug smuggler"?

2. Will The Courier Mail be publishing information re the illegal nature of her conviction?

3. Will The Courier Mail be publishing information about the current complaints (re the lack of a formal Australian police investigation, into the Australian crimes closely connected to the allegations against Schapelle), that are currently before The Commonwealth Ombudsman, plus The Federal Integrity Commissioner Philip Moss and The Queensland Parliamentary Crime & Misconduct Committee?

4. Is The Courier Mail formally aware of any . . .

a. CCTV evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

b. Direct physical & forensic evidence from the Australian premises of Schapelle, that connects her to the drugs found in her bag?

c. Luggage weight evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

d. Phone and banking record evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

e. Finger print and human DNA evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

And further to the above, I also rang the Media Alliance, to speak to someone there re the process for formal complaints, relating to Point 1 of their Code of Ethics. No-one was available to speak to me (even informally), because all complaints are examined by an elected panel of 12 people, and have to be in writing. So asked who was on this panel, and the woman I was speaking to wasn't sure if she could tell me, because of "Privacy issues." She said she would investigate that further, and she would call me back, if I didn't call her back first. I said that was fine.

Addit to the above - Tuesday 1st June 2010

Rang David's office again to-day (around 12.30pm), to confirm that he has received the above questions. Got that confirmation very efficiently. Thank you. I then added that three formal complaints have gone into firstly, The Commonwealth Ombudsman, The Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee and Philip Moss Federal Integrity Commissioner, re Australian police corruption surrounding the non-investigation of the export, production/cultivation and supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana - and did David wish to report on that breaking story? Because I reckon it's newsworthy. Anyway, I asked if those important details could be passed on to him, and I'd ring back this afternoon to confirm David's interest in doing that story, or otherwise. And if it's "Otherwise," then I think that "Otherwise" should be laid naked for the whole World to see.

Addit to the above - Tuesday 1st June 2010 (around 4pm)

Just had a phone call directly from David Fagan (asking me not to "Bother" his secretary again), no mention at all of any journalistic interest in correcting the public record re the blatant illegality of Schapelle's conviction - and when I asked David if he intended to report on the current complaints (documented above), re possible Australian police corruption related to their non-investigation of three Australian crimes (export, cultivation & supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana), he bluntly told me "No," he wouldn't be reporting on it, because it wasn't "Newsworthy."

So I could be rude and suggest, in the light of that, David obviously got his qualifications off the back of a cornflake packet, but I won't. Instead, I'll just plod along, and put in those formal complaints to The Media Alliance . . . and now, there's no need for me to "Bother" David's delightful secretary again (no worries), because I've got all the info I need. Thanks for taking the time David, very much appreciated, but when this hits the World stage, don't you think your public performance will look very, very grubby? Though come to think of it, that's never been a problem for Murdoch, has it?