Thursday, March 17, 2011

Schapelle Corby - The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions Flouts the Law













Click on that picture to enlarge and read a letter from the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, dated 15 March 2011, in relation to his actions against Schapelle's book.


You may choose to respond to my inquiries, or you may choose to ignore them, though I'm formally requesting a response to this missive. I will send you a formal reminder in due course if I hear nothing back within a reasonable period, and at reasonable intervals thereafter until I do. But your choice one way or the other will not prevent public exposure of your naked disregard for the law - because your silence and inability to respond without convicting yourself will ring out around the Globe. It's now on the public record that you are refusing to respond on a matter of law. Please note the book you attacked has already been translated into six languages, and is still selling strongly.

Please let me know if there's anything you don't understand about this quote in relation to the Australian legislation you used against Schapelle (hi-lited to aid your comprehension) . . .

There is no requirement that a person has been convicted of an offence, but the court hearing the application for the order must be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the person has committed an offence.

So I'm formally asking you to explain and detail (for the benefit of the World), the "Evidence" of Schapelle's alleged "Offence." You say her book was the "Proceeds of crime," so where is your evidence she committed one? Are you free to ignore the law, and the legislation, in relation to this crucial point? Are you above the law?

So Christopher, as the law in Australia (relating to the 2002 Act used against Schapelle), requires you to prove (on the balance of probabilities), that the target committed a crime, where is your evidence against Schapelle? Where is your "Balance of probabilities"? Where is your evidence she committed any offence? That's an extremely reasonable question, and one only a corrupt Director of Public Prosecutions would avoid - and the World will be your judge.

Regards, Kim