@auntiesocial
You dont know what Im an expert in.
I am familiar with the concepts of rule of law and spirit of law. Why doesnt the Canadian government fly some Special Operations people into Indonesia and get Neil out, if the rule of law and spirit of law were so obviously violated? Maybe your legal experts can explain a concept to you called "evidence". Do you have any audio EVIDENCE of conspiracy between the prosecution, court officers, police? Do you have any video EVIDENCE of corruption, any photo EVIDENCE of bribery, blackmail, extortion? Thats why no ones busting anyone out theres no EVIDENCE of corruption, what you have in an opinion, a position on the state of jurisprudence. Thats not EVIDENCE.
Everyone was found guilty, that would appear to be consistent to me.
One expert says something was inappropriate, does your one expert speak for the entire profession? Is your child psychology expert an expert on psychology or on how to conduct an investigation and secure a conviction. It would appear the investigators were doing a great job of getting a conviction, those are the type of officers that get promotions.
Do you have any EVIDENCE to support your claim the prosecutors manipulation was illegal? A trial are adversarial processes, prosecutors are supposed to defend their clients (the government) zealously, they dont pull punches or use kid gloves.
Was your expert present during the questioning of the victims during their interview?
Yeah there is a whole body of literature to support the power of persuasive communication, there is also a lot of literature to support the position that young children CAN tell the difference between reality and fantasy. Do you have clinical EVIDENCE that PROVES the victims statements and testimony are fictional.
None of that has anything to do with the guilt or innocence of the defendants. You cant say that would get the case tossed out in a western court, are you in a position to actually that hypothesis, or is that just an opinion of yours?
Almost zero, so not impossible? Do you have any EVIDENCE to test this alternative theory of yours, or is that all it is, a theory, that you can not PROVE.
My position that they are guilty is strongly supported by fact, and my judicial/legal expert is the presiding Judge in the Jakarta Southern District court, and the difference between my expert and your experts, is that my experts opinion is one that matters.
@hallier
Do you have the facts right, more specifically do you have any facts at all? Do you personally HAVE the medical reports available for inspection, or do you have media reports of them of what they are claimed to be.
That doesnt make a lot of sense that someone would first go overseas for a medical exam when it would be so much easier to go "shopping" for the right diagnosis so much easier locally, since everyone in Indonesia is corrupt it appears.
Maybe the Singapore medical team erred, and the parent wanted a second opinion and the Jakarta hospital not only confirmed the crime but that the Singapore medical examination was incompetent.
No I cant assume thats what the ambassador meant, since Im not capable or reading minds, or intentions and must rely on the actual statements made and reflected in the ACTUAL record, not what I imagine or want to interpret what someone "meant". Can you read the ambassadors mind?
Maybe the stone was real. Dissolve 100g of a variety of "caine" family of anesthetics into aqueous solution (or isopropanol) suspend a weighted string/thread and you can grow a crystal of it, that looks very much like a stone. Making it appear and disappear, thats a trivial form of sleight of hand, I can make a coin disappear and reappear from your ear, thats nothing.
Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
-
auntiesocial
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:10 am
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
Psyguy
"Why doesnt the Canadian government fly some Special Operations people into Indonesia and get Neil out?"
Because countries do not do this for individual legal cases for regular citizens. This statement is idiotic.
"Do you have any video EVIDENCE of corruption?"
I don't need any. All I would need is to demonstrate that correct procedure has not been carried out in this case. And yes, I do know for a fact that this is enough to have a case thrown out of any reputable court system. Anyone with a basic legal understing knows this. You have been provided with scores of reasons and examples of why normal investigative and legal procedure was not followed but you continue to ignore this. The point about the legal NGOs mentioned is that there is ample evidence from these organisations of cases where proper legal procedures have not been followed - just like this case. EVIDENCE for the defense has been deemed inadmissable for no reason.
"Is your child psychology expert an expert on psychology?"
Bahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahah…………draws breath…………..hahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahah
"or on how to conduct an investigation and secure a conviction. It would appear the investigators were doing a great job of getting a conviction, those are the type of officers that get promotions"
So what you're arguing is that, even if police officers coerce children into concocting stories, this is simply excellent police work. Fantastic logic.
"My position that they are guilty is strongly supported by fact, and my judicial/legal expert is the presiding Judge in the Jakarta Southern District court, and the difference between my expert and your experts, is that my experts opinion is one that matters."
Right. So a judge's verdict, by itself, consitutes a "fact" in the case. Therefore, no judge has ever made an incorrect decision in the history of law, because that would no longer make the guilt of the accused, a "fact. Furthermore, a judge that makes references to the existence of magic stones in her verdict is an export that you trust? This keeps getting better and better.
It frightens me that you're a teacher. You cannot string a coherent or rational sentence together.
"Why doesnt the Canadian government fly some Special Operations people into Indonesia and get Neil out?"
Because countries do not do this for individual legal cases for regular citizens. This statement is idiotic.
"Do you have any video EVIDENCE of corruption?"
I don't need any. All I would need is to demonstrate that correct procedure has not been carried out in this case. And yes, I do know for a fact that this is enough to have a case thrown out of any reputable court system. Anyone with a basic legal understing knows this. You have been provided with scores of reasons and examples of why normal investigative and legal procedure was not followed but you continue to ignore this. The point about the legal NGOs mentioned is that there is ample evidence from these organisations of cases where proper legal procedures have not been followed - just like this case. EVIDENCE for the defense has been deemed inadmissable for no reason.
"Is your child psychology expert an expert on psychology?"
Bahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahah…………draws breath…………..hahahahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhahahahahah
"or on how to conduct an investigation and secure a conviction. It would appear the investigators were doing a great job of getting a conviction, those are the type of officers that get promotions"
So what you're arguing is that, even if police officers coerce children into concocting stories, this is simply excellent police work. Fantastic logic.
"My position that they are guilty is strongly supported by fact, and my judicial/legal expert is the presiding Judge in the Jakarta Southern District court, and the difference between my expert and your experts, is that my experts opinion is one that matters."
Right. So a judge's verdict, by itself, consitutes a "fact" in the case. Therefore, no judge has ever made an incorrect decision in the history of law, because that would no longer make the guilt of the accused, a "fact. Furthermore, a judge that makes references to the existence of magic stones in her verdict is an export that you trust? This keeps getting better and better.
It frightens me that you're a teacher. You cannot string a coherent or rational sentence together.
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
Uh, did Psyguy really just advocate for the existence of the magic stone?!
I really do wonder about you mate.
I really do wonder about you mate.
Reply
@tangchao
Yes I advocated the position of a "magic stone":
1) It was the term the victims offered in testimony, the jurist is citing that testimony and using congruent terms in their findings to avoid confusion of the event/item.
2) "Magic" as a term can accurately describe an even or phenomenon that is not understood, and given the age of the victims and their intellectual and cognitive development "magic stone" may very well fit the description to what they are attempting to communicate.
3) There may very well have been some type of crystal or stone with anesthetic chemical properties, we dont know, and its not impossible.
4) The "magic stone" may be a construct. Either a cognitive mechanism to explain what happened to them or possibly the result of being drugged by the blue smoothies or through some other method.
@auntiesocial
Yes they do, governments rescue people who are wrongfully held captive all the time. Somalia pirates, terrorists groups, etc.; governments rescue people using force who are unlawfully held against their will all the time, unless your position now is that the Indonesian government is LAWFULLY holding Neil and his accomplice?
The classic defense of those who have no evidence "I dont need any evidence", in short, yes you do, legal arguments and positions are supported and defended on the basis of evidence. How are you going to demonstrate (which is just another term for prove) that "correct" procedures were not followed?
Reversible error is more than just differences or disagreements in protocol, or opinion. Its quite easy to find two jurists with the same case, who will reach different conclusions and findings, and neither one of their judgments be in error.
Your position would seem to contradict reality, unless the Jakarta Southern District court is not reputable, which you have no EVIDENCE that it is unreputable, in which case were back to the special forces rescue option.
I am not ignoring your examples or your positions or your arguments, I even find them to have merit, what I dont find is that they are conclusive to support the sole position that the convicted are innocent. Thats the real miscarriage of justice in this issue, the judicial process did not provide a reasonable exploration of the facts, evidence and testimony to allow a definitive conclusion to be reached. That doesnt mean the Neil and his accomplice are innocent, or even not guilty, at best all it provides us is a "we dont know".
The standards of the Indonesian judicial process and the determination of the crimes in this case are not one in the same, they are separate issues, which as you can read in my earlier posts and continue to do so, have remain unchanged; neither you, nor I, nor anyone (except the convicted, and the victims) "KNOW" what happened.
The finding and positions of the NGOs in regard to OTHER cases are irrelevant to this case, if that requirement was true, NO court in the world would be able to defend itself as being fair, and unbiased. There has been some level of corruption in every nations legal system at some point in time to some measurable degree. This is a generalization fallacy, a characteristic of an individual can not be applied to the group, because the individual shares membership in the group.
The EVIDENCE was deemed inadmissible for a reason, you just dont agree with that reason, which does not invalidate the cause.
Yes is your child psychology expert an expert? What are their qualifications, their experience, you cite nothing to assess the providence or to voirdire your "expert". An article or writer that claims expertise is not self authenticating.
Again, your claims are absent foundation, do you have any EVIDENCE the witnesses were coerced or EVIDENCE that the testimony was concocted/fabricated? Absent EVIDENCE, than yes that is by many definitions excellent investigative/police work.
Yes, that is the very definition of "verdict" it is so titled as "findings of fact" and they remain facts until they are proven wrong and reversed. Facts are by empirical definition true until proven wrong. It would no longer from that point forward make the verdict and findings a fact, AFTER the point they are determined to be in error. Thats how facts work, the defining assumption is that they are true.
This is an issue of etymology, many things, events, and phenomenon that are not understood can be accurately described as "magic". If there is a better word choice, id be open to discussion, but the particular term as used conveys the intended meaning.
Yes I advocated the position of a "magic stone":
1) It was the term the victims offered in testimony, the jurist is citing that testimony and using congruent terms in their findings to avoid confusion of the event/item.
2) "Magic" as a term can accurately describe an even or phenomenon that is not understood, and given the age of the victims and their intellectual and cognitive development "magic stone" may very well fit the description to what they are attempting to communicate.
3) There may very well have been some type of crystal or stone with anesthetic chemical properties, we dont know, and its not impossible.
4) The "magic stone" may be a construct. Either a cognitive mechanism to explain what happened to them or possibly the result of being drugged by the blue smoothies or through some other method.
@auntiesocial
Yes they do, governments rescue people who are wrongfully held captive all the time. Somalia pirates, terrorists groups, etc.; governments rescue people using force who are unlawfully held against their will all the time, unless your position now is that the Indonesian government is LAWFULLY holding Neil and his accomplice?
The classic defense of those who have no evidence "I dont need any evidence", in short, yes you do, legal arguments and positions are supported and defended on the basis of evidence. How are you going to demonstrate (which is just another term for prove) that "correct" procedures were not followed?
Reversible error is more than just differences or disagreements in protocol, or opinion. Its quite easy to find two jurists with the same case, who will reach different conclusions and findings, and neither one of their judgments be in error.
Your position would seem to contradict reality, unless the Jakarta Southern District court is not reputable, which you have no EVIDENCE that it is unreputable, in which case were back to the special forces rescue option.
I am not ignoring your examples or your positions or your arguments, I even find them to have merit, what I dont find is that they are conclusive to support the sole position that the convicted are innocent. Thats the real miscarriage of justice in this issue, the judicial process did not provide a reasonable exploration of the facts, evidence and testimony to allow a definitive conclusion to be reached. That doesnt mean the Neil and his accomplice are innocent, or even not guilty, at best all it provides us is a "we dont know".
The standards of the Indonesian judicial process and the determination of the crimes in this case are not one in the same, they are separate issues, which as you can read in my earlier posts and continue to do so, have remain unchanged; neither you, nor I, nor anyone (except the convicted, and the victims) "KNOW" what happened.
The finding and positions of the NGOs in regard to OTHER cases are irrelevant to this case, if that requirement was true, NO court in the world would be able to defend itself as being fair, and unbiased. There has been some level of corruption in every nations legal system at some point in time to some measurable degree. This is a generalization fallacy, a characteristic of an individual can not be applied to the group, because the individual shares membership in the group.
The EVIDENCE was deemed inadmissible for a reason, you just dont agree with that reason, which does not invalidate the cause.
Yes is your child psychology expert an expert? What are their qualifications, their experience, you cite nothing to assess the providence or to voirdire your "expert". An article or writer that claims expertise is not self authenticating.
Again, your claims are absent foundation, do you have any EVIDENCE the witnesses were coerced or EVIDENCE that the testimony was concocted/fabricated? Absent EVIDENCE, than yes that is by many definitions excellent investigative/police work.
Yes, that is the very definition of "verdict" it is so titled as "findings of fact" and they remain facts until they are proven wrong and reversed. Facts are by empirical definition true until proven wrong. It would no longer from that point forward make the verdict and findings a fact, AFTER the point they are determined to be in error. Thats how facts work, the defining assumption is that they are true.
This is an issue of etymology, many things, events, and phenomenon that are not understood can be accurately described as "magic". If there is a better word choice, id be open to discussion, but the particular term as used conveys the intended meaning.
-
auntiesocial
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:10 am
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
Psyguy
Thanks for reinforcing my argument for me.
"Thats the real miscarriage of justice in this issue, the judicial process did not provide a reasonable exploration of the facts, evidence and testimony to allow a definitive conclusion to be reached. That doesnt mean the Neil and his accomplice are innocent, or even not guilty, at best all it provides us is a "we dont know"."
And this is the failure of a court procedure you fail to acknowledge or understand. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. When we "DO NOT KNOW" as you yourself have expressed, it means that the prosecution have not proved thier case. Therefore, the only morally and legally accepted verdict is not guilty. You have contradicted yourself, time and time again. In a previous post you have suggested that you know that he is guilty, yet you acknolwedge now that you DO NOT KNOW.
"Jakarta Southern District court is not reputable, which you have no EVIDENCE that it is unreputable."
Yes I do, and it's been outlined to you countless times. You just ignore it at your convenience.
"The EVIDENCE was deemed inadmissible for a reason". No it wasn't. Against all international conventions. This is FACT, not opinion. And this does matter. I've repeated to you countless times and you continue to ignore this argument. When proper legal procedure have not been followed - something that WE KNOW AS FACT - then a miscarriage of justice has occurred. This is open and shut logic and no amount of sophistry and obfuscation from you changes that fact.
"phenomenon that are not understood can be accurately described as "magic""
I'll end with this, because this is the most profoundly stupid statement I have ever read on this forum.
Thanks for reinforcing my argument for me.
"Thats the real miscarriage of justice in this issue, the judicial process did not provide a reasonable exploration of the facts, evidence and testimony to allow a definitive conclusion to be reached. That doesnt mean the Neil and his accomplice are innocent, or even not guilty, at best all it provides us is a "we dont know"."
And this is the failure of a court procedure you fail to acknowledge or understand. The burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. When we "DO NOT KNOW" as you yourself have expressed, it means that the prosecution have not proved thier case. Therefore, the only morally and legally accepted verdict is not guilty. You have contradicted yourself, time and time again. In a previous post you have suggested that you know that he is guilty, yet you acknolwedge now that you DO NOT KNOW.
"Jakarta Southern District court is not reputable, which you have no EVIDENCE that it is unreputable."
Yes I do, and it's been outlined to you countless times. You just ignore it at your convenience.
"The EVIDENCE was deemed inadmissible for a reason". No it wasn't. Against all international conventions. This is FACT, not opinion. And this does matter. I've repeated to you countless times and you continue to ignore this argument. When proper legal procedure have not been followed - something that WE KNOW AS FACT - then a miscarriage of justice has occurred. This is open and shut logic and no amount of sophistry and obfuscation from you changes that fact.
"phenomenon that are not understood can be accurately described as "magic""
I'll end with this, because this is the most profoundly stupid statement I have ever read on this forum.
Reply
@auntiesocial
You are applying western standards and expectations to jurisdictions and regions they do not apply. There is no internationally recognized standard or expectation of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt". The standard in Indonesia is MUCH lower, conviction requires ONLY TWO pieces of evidence supporting the charges/indictment. In this case the testimony of the victim, and the Jakarta hospital/medical report are sufficient to find the accused guilty. This is not wrong, this is just different, and in general tends to be common in Asian jurisprudence. The most common advice from the DOS, Home Office and Ministries of Foreign Affairs is that you are subject to the laws of the host nation. You do not get to take your home nations Constitution with you to foreign countries. Indonesia is not Canada.
Acquittal is not the ONLY moral (which is irrelevant) or legal outcome, even in western courts the outcome would likely be a retrial or mistrial. Allowing the prosecution or the Crown to decide if it wished to pursue the case and trial again. That doesnt mean, nor would I want, the outcome to be a "pass" on a technicality to set a pedo rapist free. Even in the case of judicial abuse, the wrong of the government does not balance or compensate for the the wrong of the accused.
There is no contradiction, I know hes guilty, the courts findings and judgement make that a fact. What I dont know is the merit of the events in this case. Do you see how those are different? Guilt is a determination/decision of the court, thats true, that happened, thats a fact, and that the events and what actually did or did not happen (the events) I dont know.
Again, no you havent PROVEN its not reputable, you have claims and opinions of varying sources, thats not proof. If you have a document (confession), video, audio, photographic evidence, or witness testimony to actual events and actions of the judiciary of misconduct, and/or corruption, that is EVIDENCE, that is proof. Your reference to journalistic articles, media, experts comments, and historical incidence of PAST misconduct within the Indonesian judicial system are not proof or EVIDENCE. No more than your past bad acts would be EVIDENCE in criminal proceedings against you. If you were accused of petty theft, if you had prior arrests for petty theft those would not be admissible EVIDENCE that could be presented as proof that you had committed petty theft in a current judicial proceeding.
Setting aside the argument of international criminal and legal standards as being fact or opinion. International conventions of evidence and rules of criminal procedure do not apply, this is not an "international" court it is an INDONESIAN court, Indonesias rules of admissibility of evidence apply. It is an irrelevant fact, just as the weather in London is no more irrelevant to the weather in Jakarta. It is a fact that is not applicable and irrelevant.
I do not ignore your argument, I dismiss it because western international rules of admissibility do NOT apply in Indonesian courts. You continue to maintain the argument that they do.
It is open and shut, you want Indonesian justice to be how YOU think it should be, not how it is, and thats not reality.
You are applying western standards and expectations to jurisdictions and regions they do not apply. There is no internationally recognized standard or expectation of guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt". The standard in Indonesia is MUCH lower, conviction requires ONLY TWO pieces of evidence supporting the charges/indictment. In this case the testimony of the victim, and the Jakarta hospital/medical report are sufficient to find the accused guilty. This is not wrong, this is just different, and in general tends to be common in Asian jurisprudence. The most common advice from the DOS, Home Office and Ministries of Foreign Affairs is that you are subject to the laws of the host nation. You do not get to take your home nations Constitution with you to foreign countries. Indonesia is not Canada.
Acquittal is not the ONLY moral (which is irrelevant) or legal outcome, even in western courts the outcome would likely be a retrial or mistrial. Allowing the prosecution or the Crown to decide if it wished to pursue the case and trial again. That doesnt mean, nor would I want, the outcome to be a "pass" on a technicality to set a pedo rapist free. Even in the case of judicial abuse, the wrong of the government does not balance or compensate for the the wrong of the accused.
There is no contradiction, I know hes guilty, the courts findings and judgement make that a fact. What I dont know is the merit of the events in this case. Do you see how those are different? Guilt is a determination/decision of the court, thats true, that happened, thats a fact, and that the events and what actually did or did not happen (the events) I dont know.
Again, no you havent PROVEN its not reputable, you have claims and opinions of varying sources, thats not proof. If you have a document (confession), video, audio, photographic evidence, or witness testimony to actual events and actions of the judiciary of misconduct, and/or corruption, that is EVIDENCE, that is proof. Your reference to journalistic articles, media, experts comments, and historical incidence of PAST misconduct within the Indonesian judicial system are not proof or EVIDENCE. No more than your past bad acts would be EVIDENCE in criminal proceedings against you. If you were accused of petty theft, if you had prior arrests for petty theft those would not be admissible EVIDENCE that could be presented as proof that you had committed petty theft in a current judicial proceeding.
Setting aside the argument of international criminal and legal standards as being fact or opinion. International conventions of evidence and rules of criminal procedure do not apply, this is not an "international" court it is an INDONESIAN court, Indonesias rules of admissibility of evidence apply. It is an irrelevant fact, just as the weather in London is no more irrelevant to the weather in Jakarta. It is a fact that is not applicable and irrelevant.
I do not ignore your argument, I dismiss it because western international rules of admissibility do NOT apply in Indonesian courts. You continue to maintain the argument that they do.
It is open and shut, you want Indonesian justice to be how YOU think it should be, not how it is, and thats not reality.
-
lifeisnotsobad
- Posts: 133
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 3:37 pm
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
SighGuy...you do not KNOW he is guilty. However, you do know that the court has found him guilty. This may surprise you but they are two different things.
Comment
@lifeisnotsobad
That does not surprise me, and was part of my position in my previous post, to which we agree. I KNOW the Jakarta Southern District court has found him guilty, I do NOT KNOW if he committed the acts for which he was found guilty of. His guilt is a fact, as that is a legal definition, which the competent judicial authority has concluded. What transpired in the series of events the victims are claiming, I dont know, I got tired of shaking my crystal ball and getting the "Outcome hazy, try again later".
In jurisprudence this might be describes as appealing to the burden of all doubt which we can really never know, in contrast to other standards of doubt. My position from the beginning has been that we dont know, and likely are never going to know the truth or reality of what did or did not happen.
That does not surprise me, and was part of my position in my previous post, to which we agree. I KNOW the Jakarta Southern District court has found him guilty, I do NOT KNOW if he committed the acts for which he was found guilty of. His guilt is a fact, as that is a legal definition, which the competent judicial authority has concluded. What transpired in the series of events the victims are claiming, I dont know, I got tired of shaking my crystal ball and getting the "Outcome hazy, try again later".
In jurisprudence this might be describes as appealing to the burden of all doubt which we can really never know, in contrast to other standards of doubt. My position from the beginning has been that we dont know, and likely are never going to know the truth or reality of what did or did not happen.
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
After watching this kangaroo court I just can't fathom why any one would go to Indonesia to teach. It was not too long ago the government made all schools remove the word "international" from their name and all signage. Crucifying Neil as a warning to other teachers thinking about coming to Indonesia is about as corrupt and low as you can get.
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
Meanwhile they just let one of their terrorists free: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... m=Facebook
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
Reply
@Michelle
Indonesia is not crucifying NB, they are imprisoning him after being convicted of pedo rape. There is no cross and nails involved. Indonesia is not a place you mess with (just like SG), the Indonesian government executed 6 foreigners for narcotic offenses, and they didnt shed a single tear over it. If you cant handle another counties rules, dont go.
Indonesia is still a very attractive for many ITS, and many tell themselves "its not going to happen to me", JIS has no shortage of applications to fill vacancies.
Indonesia is not crucifying NB, they are imprisoning him after being convicted of pedo rape. There is no cross and nails involved. Indonesia is not a place you mess with (just like SG), the Indonesian government executed 6 foreigners for narcotic offenses, and they didnt shed a single tear over it. If you cant handle another counties rules, dont go.
Indonesia is still a very attractive for many ITS, and many tell themselves "its not going to happen to me", JIS has no shortage of applications to fill vacancies.
-
Yantantether
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:41 am
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
'If you cant handle another counties rules, dont go.'
The issue people have right now with Indonesia is their obvious disregard for the basic tenements of a transparent and just legal system. NB has been convicted by a medieval kangaroo court and is innocent. And let's not forget the cleaner who killed himself behind bars and the young girl who was about to marry her childhood sweetheart. The same judicial system has seen one of the Bali bombers released after serving only 8 yrs of an already paltry 18 yrs sentence for killing 20 people. So, in Indonesia you will be forgiven and released early for mass murder of tourists but should you dare sell drugs to Indonesian nationals then they will take your life. Common theme here? Not surprised your moral compass doesn't point in the same direction as most of us on these issues!
I wouldn't touch the place with a shitty stick!
The issue people have right now with Indonesia is their obvious disregard for the basic tenements of a transparent and just legal system. NB has been convicted by a medieval kangaroo court and is innocent. And let's not forget the cleaner who killed himself behind bars and the young girl who was about to marry her childhood sweetheart. The same judicial system has seen one of the Bali bombers released after serving only 8 yrs of an already paltry 18 yrs sentence for killing 20 people. So, in Indonesia you will be forgiven and released early for mass murder of tourists but should you dare sell drugs to Indonesian nationals then they will take your life. Common theme here? Not surprised your moral compass doesn't point in the same direction as most of us on these issues!
I wouldn't touch the place with a shitty stick!
Reply
@Yantantether
They have a "just" legal system and its pretty transparent a prosecutor needs two pieces of evidence to convict, thats just by Indonesian definitions, its just not "western" justice. Which isnt the only type of justice in the world. The trial and prosecution was very transparent.
We dont know hes innocent, I dont, you dont, there are only a few people who KNOW if hes innocent.
The 8 year release was the prescribed time before parole. Western systems of justice can be just as lenient. Yes i applaud the Indonesian cultures approach to drugs, look at SG, very little drug abuse, many western cultures would be able to end the "war on drugs" if they treated it a an actual war, and not a wrist slap and a stern talking too.
They have a "just" legal system and its pretty transparent a prosecutor needs two pieces of evidence to convict, thats just by Indonesian definitions, its just not "western" justice. Which isnt the only type of justice in the world. The trial and prosecution was very transparent.
We dont know hes innocent, I dont, you dont, there are only a few people who KNOW if hes innocent.
The 8 year release was the prescribed time before parole. Western systems of justice can be just as lenient. Yes i applaud the Indonesian cultures approach to drugs, look at SG, very little drug abuse, many western cultures would be able to end the "war on drugs" if they treated it a an actual war, and not a wrist slap and a stern talking too.
-
Yantantether
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:41 am
Re: Neil Bantlemann Guilty!!
Not interested in your 'Devil's Advocate' persona TBH, hence no interest in further discourse. Life's too short!