Monday, January 31, 2011

Schapelle Corby - The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity is Wilfully Blind

Click on the above to enlarge and read. A letter from ACLEI, dated 25th January 2011, in relation to Schapelle Corby. Received on the 31st of January 2011.

Dear Phillip,

Thank you for the above letter.

Now please explain the following to me, and the Global public . . . as I'm sure your "Investigations" must have revealed the answers . . .

1. Why did the Australian Federal Police . . .

a) . . . fail to preserve a single frame of CCTV relating to either Schapelle or her luggage (from three Australian Airports, see point 9 of The Evidence File).

b) . . . fail to access the Mutual Assistance Treaty with Indonesia, in order to ensure the physical evidence was forensically examined (see point 10 of The Evidence File), and also lie about this crucial testing to the media.

c) . . . fail to investigate the Australian grower and supplier of the drugs found in Schapelle's bag (see point 12 of The Evidence File).

. . . in order to discover the true perpetrator of this Federal crime as . . .

i) . . . it was highly unlikely Schapelle was a criminal engaged in drug smuggling, in fact this supposition was (and is), patently absurd (see points 1, 2, 3, 6 & 13 of The Evidence File).

ii) . . . there was massive evidence of insider corruption at Australian airports (see points 14 & 16 of The Evidence File).

iii) . . . there was clear evidence from other airline passengers (and staff), of corrupt activity at Australian airports (see point 17 of The Evidence File).

iv) . . . it was bizarre, to the point of absurdity, to imagine such an "Amateur" smuggling attempt made it past the extensive security measures at three Australian airports (see point 5 of The Evidence File).

v) . . . her luggage was easily available to corrupt insiders (see point 7 of The Evidence File).

I look forward to your formal and comprehensive response to these legitimate questions. In reply, please reproduce points 1 a, b and c (above), for clarity - and provide your answers beneath. I will phone you later on to-day (Tuesday 1st February 2011), to ensure you are in receipt of this correspondence - and follow up formally (again), in four weeks time, on Tuesday 1st March 2011, if I have had no response by then.

Further, please also treat this letter as a formal FOI request to ACLEI, for any and all documentation relating to my formal complaints to you, vis a vis your now "Completed" inquiries.

I also note your "Investigations" in relation to the QANTAS baggage handlers are continuing, as well as your investigations into "Tom." I look forward to hearing from you on those matters.

Regards, Kim

PS - This correspondence is now formally noted at point 18 in The Evidence File, in the sixth starred paragraph within that section.