Bali the holiday from Hell 152

Security Camera Evidence.

There must be a reason as to why the camera evidence was never presented. You don't know at all if those footages shws that Schapelle was guilty or not. Maybe it shows that she is and the evidence was not presented because the prosecution would have presses the rest sentence. Would you think that Australians would like to see a buxom western female be shot?

Fingerprinting.

Do you think that fingerprinting could prove her innocence? Any smart courier would have used gloves (I would have thought of that and I am not a courier) in order to stop any evidence from pointing to self (Schapelle in this case). The fact was that the evidence was in her bag and the customs officer stated in court that she was reluctant to open the bag.

Data missing.

It seems that we are going around in circles and I have stated this before. You cannot just delete certain information in a computer operating system without leaving "electronic fingerprints" The job would be too great for just a pillow sized of cannabis

You are onviously not a traveller by plane.

The baggage labels are printed and stuck on each check-in bagage. These labels are identified to the particular pbuttenger and it contains the total weight of the luggage and the total number of parcels. In Schapelle's case, I am sure that she would have at least two because one would be her personal belongings and the other a boogey board.

Both tags would have had to been removed and beig a boogie board, they would have been seperate to the normal baggage as being unusual size. You can check that out with your baggage handler neighbour. Since they are seperate, it would be harder for a baggage handler to take off both labels.

Now since the baggage labels would have been on at least on of the total baggage, then all you need is to weigh them on a scale and if they were planted, then the weight would have been approximately 4 kilograms over the printed weight on the label. You the data never was missing as to proclaim.

Why would you take a boogey board when she could purchase one in Indonesia for next to nothing especially when she had relatives that had connections in surf shops in Bali?

Then how else you have refused to see that both cases were circumstantial evidence and both were charges and convicted. Probably if the Schapelle case was in Australia, she could have been still charged and sent to prison.

It was you that claimed that the Indonesian authorities were not fair but in reality they have bent over to suit the conditions for Schapelle clearly by the fact that the prisoner was brought into Indonesia to testify for Schapelle which is completely unorthadox to the Indonesian courts system.

Australia would never bring in evidence from overseas unless they were handled by Australian authorities because there is no way that the evidence could have been tainted.

What - Did you ejaculate?