(The Evidence File is a growing, graphic resource for future legal needs, plus an on-line reference for present and future film makers, authors and journalists. You will find direct mention of the ABC in points 4 and 21 - and a direct link to these questions in point 4, 2nd paragraph. Further, despite four reminders to date, the ABC have failed to confirm receipt of the questions below).
In the new book about Schapelle, there's (potentially), a chapter about the role of the ABC, called "Dead Men Can't Sue." So I'd like to give you the opportunity to respond to these questions . . . And in order to be fair, as I assume you'll have to pass them on to research staff to look through previous material, I'll get in touch again (formally), if I haven't heard back in six weeks (by the 23rd February 2011). I look forward to a very comprehensive response.
Please reproduce my questions when you reply (1 through to 8), and place your direct answer/s beneath, to provide clarity . . .
1. In this ABC Lateline report about Schapelle's Father, there is not a single new (alleged), fact, specific or relevant to the time it was broadcast (July 2008) - so why did you wait until six months after Michael Corby's death (in January 2008), to run it, given all the unfounded allegations you reported were available long before he died?
2. Is the ABC aware that no family member, of any dead person, is allowed to sue for defamation on their behalf?
3. If the ABC had run that report during Michael Corby's lifetime (for which you had to apologise), would either the ABC, or the ABC's "Informants," have been (potentially), open to legal action, for defamation? (I will also be seeking independent advice on this).
4. Has the ABC ever specifically mentioned, in any report about Schapelle or her Father, that this police certificate (re Michael Corby, confirming he had NO police record), was issued in November 2007, a full 9 months before your Lateline programme in July 2008?
5. Has the ABC ever specifically mentioned, in any report about Schapelle or her Father, that the Queensland Police issued a formal statement (in July 2008), confirming Michael Corby had NO links to the drug trade?
"And she pointed out that one week ago the Queensland Police had issued a statement saying that there was no evidence to link Michael Corby to the drug trade." Daily Telegraph, July 14 2008
6. Has the ABC ever specifically mentioned, in any report about Schapelle or her Father, this United Nations report (published in 2007), which confirms, on pages 233 and 234, the fantastically small price of marijuana in Indonesia (30 US cents a gram, top price), compared to Australia ($US31 a gram, top price), current in 2005? Here's some recent, graphic commentary of mine on this issue. And before you run for cover behind the allegations of journalist Matthew Moore, re a type of Australian marijuana called "Aussie Gold," I suggest you take a long, hard look at point 1 here, and follow the links provided in that segment, for your education.
7. Has the ABC ever mentioned, in any report about Schapelle or her Father, that she is the only person (ever), convicted of smuggling a commercial amount of marijuana FROM Australia, TO Bali? (Scroll down to the press reports, in point 2 here).
To any sensible person (except it seems, the producers at the ABC), given the pungency and bulk of commercial marijuana, that suggests either every border cop in Bali and Australia is completely blind and stupid (and every security measure completely ineffective), or this "Trade" does not exist.
8. Before the ABC ran this Lateline segment about Schapelle's Father, did your researchers seek advice from any police in force in Australia, or from any formal organisation (potentially able to supply you with relevant information, as listed/starred in point 2 here), and/or The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, re the existence (or otherwise), of a commercial flow of marijuana FROM Australia, TO Bali? If not, why didn't you seek this information, and if you did, what was the outcome?