Click on that picture (above), to enlarge and read a letter from the Attorney General's Office, dated 22nd December 2010.
This proves that, despite the fact Schapelle's bags were handled by the same career criminals/QANTAS baggage handlers (the AFP even admitted they were criminals), who smuggled millions of dollars worth of drugs into Australia, on the same day, at around the same time she flew (they were even under formal police surveillance then, p 42), the Australian Federal Police failed to discharge their duty. This is because they did not formally ask the Attorney General's Office to issue a request (to Indonesia), under the Mutual Assistance Treaty, to forensically test the physical evidence/drugs (for fingerprints, human DNA & plant source), discovered in Schapelle's boogie board bag, as also described here.
Obviously, these vital tests (which were never carried out), were integral to further police investigations of these criminals, one of whom, nicknamed "Tom" . . .
"According to this man, who is now in witness protection, Hurley was involved in smuggling almost 10 kilograms of cocaine on October 8 - and a Qantas baggage handler codenamed Tom was involved in collecting the briefcase from the drug mule." SMH 2 June 2005
. . . (we know for certain), had an extensive history of trafficking in a variety of drugs, including marijuana. And then (of course), there's the documented history, point 16/SMH quotes 5 March & 8 May 2005, of domestic drug smuggling, via Australian airports, to consider.
So I will phone your Professional Standards office again next week, to find out why this formal complaint relating to these matters, has not (as yet), received a reply - and I expect to be treated in an efficient and professional manner.
PS - And if you now scroll down to Point 10 here (last paragraph), you will see a link to this new information/blog post has just been added, for ease of reference (vis a vis current and future film makers, and writers/journalists).
PPS - And if the extremely bizarre nature of Schapelle's alleged crime, as detailed in points 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 here, didn't spark your curiosity, and tell you this matter (obviously), needed much deeper investigation, then may I suggest you are either too dumb to be breathing, or corrupt.