Did Schappelle Corby Fly QF to Bali?
 

If so, or if QF's baggage handlers dealt with her luggage, why didn't Mr. Dixon speak up about the criminal proclivities of his staff?

After all, he new about them according to the ABC:-

"But what I can say is that we have had for many months, and continue to have full knowledge, of the activities of those baggage handlers alleged to be involved."

Why didn't Dixon speak up?

From the stories and reports I've seen she flew with Australian Airlines from Sydney. I'm not sure if she used AO from BNE to SYD or if it was QF. Also the ground handling for AO is done by QF.

Sunfish,
Geoff Dixon was probably unable to speak up whilst the investigation was underway by the AFP, it would have alerted the other fellows to destroy evidence etc

I've always considered the possibility the weed found in Corby's bag was intended as a distraction - in DPS. In other words the stash was actually put in her bag in DPS airport to deflect interest/attention away from a bigger, more important shipment leaving DPS.

Frankly, the movement of stash BNE-SYD via air has seemed dubious to me. Safer to chuck it in the back of a car and drive it interstate. But now.... in light of my first paragraph and the relevations today of cocaine smuggling at SYD on the same day Corby flew, perhaps "her" stash was intended as a distraction at SYD airport? And it accidently got stowed in an outbound bag instead of an inbound bag?

Who really knows? All I know for sure is that when you have NO CONTROL over your bags for hours, there are too many unsavoury possibilities.

Meanwhile I'll continue to show the f#@K!#g PAPER FLIGHT-PLAN to security einsteins as I pass through the beep-box because they insist on verifying its not something I'm going to use to take over the aircraft..... And no, I didn't go beep!!! :yuk:

..........Maybe
 

There is a chance, remote or not she actually did take stuff in with her?

Cecil,

Yeah, just throw it on top of a boogy board and leave it unlocked, then pick it up at the other end. !!! Yeah right.

Does that come under the definition of "beyond reasonable doubt" or don't they bother with those niceties in Bali?

....What if?
 

Bowelblockage, if you had been taking notice you'd know.

People in the legal system in this country (not shock jocks or watercooler experts) have commented on the almost non existent defence, due to lack of evidence to defend or incompetence?

ratpoison,

Yeah, just wrap it around your waist and/or thigh, throw a t-shirt and a pair of shorts over the top, go to an Indonesian airport with a few mates who've done exactly the same thing, then un-wrap it at the other end!!! Yeah right.

Hmmm...
 

Ya... but the scariest part of this whole thing is that everybody seems to be missing the point:

Everytime you turn on the news you hear of some Aussie/Drug related story! Don't get me wrong I applaud the authorities for catching whoever they can... but honestly if we are hearing of THIS many cases of people getting caught... just for a moment here think of how many are getting away with it! In order for this many people to be caught there must be a $HITLOAD of drugs coming in and out (mainly in) of this country right now.

-Then there was the report I heard on the radio that Aussies use more drugs per capita than Yanks, Poms and Europeans!!! What's happening to our country?!?!?!?!

Food for thought I guess.:confused:

Where does this logic break down?

At check-in:
Is this your bag madam? Yes
Did you pack it yourself? Yes
Has it been out of your sight? No

At customs on arrival:
Is this your bag madam? Yes
Did you pack it yourself? Yes
Has it been out of your sight? Yes - for about 8 hours!

Sorry you're nicked. WTF?:yuk:

Here is an incredible thing which I am only just learning about. Here's a quote about where the burden of proof lies (ie, is it with the prosecutor or the defendant) when it comes to the charge of Trafficking drugs:

“Trafficable Quantity”

If a person is found in possession of a trafficable quantity of a drug of dependence then this is prima facie evidence of trafficking. In this case the person is not likely to be charged with possession, but with the more serious offence of trafficking. This would place the burden of proof on the defendant to establish that the drug was not in his or her possession for the purposes of sale.

What jurisdiction does this apply in and where is the quote from??

Answer: the State of Victoria and here is the website for the quote:

http://www.aussielegal.com.au/

(For some reason the direct link won't work, so click on "Criminal Law", then on "Drug Offences VIC", scroll about 1/3 to 1/2 the way down, and there it is).

Incredible, huh? If you are caught trafficking drugs into Melbourne airport, the burden of proof is on you to prove your innocence.

And apparently the situation in Indonesia is exactly the same......

Ron & Edna,

It is also the same in NSW and I assume all states and also most western countries overseas.

The concept being that if someone is caught with a large & substantial amount of illegal drugs over a certain amount, then it is deemed as commercial quantity for the purpose of sale, unless they can prove otherwise.

AS SO IT SHOULD BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron & Edna Johns
No, I think you will find that you are still presumed innocent until proven guilty. What the law is saying is that you must prove that the drugs weren’t for sale as distinct from personal use which the lower charge of possession would entail.

If everybody's doing it - importing weed, smack and **** - then why not just make it legal...???

Everyone bong on and have a good time. We can all get along.

Bloody indos get off on locking up Aussies just because we kicked their asses outa E.T. and also snotted them in the 60s in Malaya.

I'm with you scrubed, it was just a bit of weed. It would seem our northern brothers don't see it that way.

Didn't we give them AU$1bn recently?

As for the so called "Bali 9", well......... heroin is terribly destructive, the Indo's can keep those ferals as long as they like.

This case interests me, due to the fact that everyone seems to have an opinion on whether she is guilty or not. (Most say shes not gulity) Ignoring the legal system, of Indonesia it just amazes me, how can anyone know whether she is guilty or not? The more important point is the subtle persuasive power the media is attaining particularly since 9/11 and the so called war on terror started. This is the most worrying thing I'm finding these days, and the worst thing is most people dont even realise it! some others have called it propoganda in the past. ( But of course propoganda never occurs in your own country! Just ask the germans during WW2) Now before you start locking on your nuclear arsenal on my post, No Im not saying this is a big conspiracy or comparing it to Nazi Germany or whatever! Just food for thought. Yes it is just a bit of weed, but this is another country, and hopefully you realise different offences can be far more severe or benign depending on where you are in this world. Go and burn the Koran in an islam country (you'd probablty be shot!) but here would not be too severe. On the other hand go and stone your wife in public for adultery in a shopping mall in Sydney! (but prob would be ok in Pakistan or Saudi) I'm not conveying a particular opinion on whether laws are right or wrong, but one thing is we should respect the legal system of each individual country. Having said all this I believe after Corby's case has been decided ( it will be guilty) info should be shared and investigated by a seperate aussie legal team, but as if that will happen, maybe Im in fantasy land!

I accept your point.

Agreed.

Not any kinda expert on the subject, but wouldn't exporting drugs from Aust to Bali be akin to exporting sand from Aust to Iraq?

4kg of weed here would have to be $40+K AUD, but worth what, $4K AUD over there??

Isn't that part of the reason some of the younger generation actually go there?

I'm led to believe the local weed is cr@p and there is a good market for quality stuff amongst the backpackers.