Execute or Rehabilitate Indonesian Style

tech/a · 1 May 2015

SirRumpole said:
Yet your own situation seems to indicate that good parenting does not always work.

You obviously grew up to be an intelligent caring person, but your brother went in the other direction.

Is this your parent's fault ?

Yes it is 100% and they would be the first to admit it.
I know exactly why and when it happened.

So by the way do many of the parents who have wayward kids
they often repeat their own situations---life experiences. You have to have that
mutual respect from as early as 5yrs old. Yes it can be developed
at a later age but rarely from the original parents. A third
party can fill a void.

Getting off the track is often due to parental issues.
Staying on that track is often the choice of the individual.
Prevention better than cure---certainly is in these cases---in my view.

sptrawler · 1 May 2015

SirRumpole said:
That's not a relevant analogy.

The real effect of the drug crime would have occurred in Australia when the drugs were sold. It would have had very little effect in Indonesia because the drugs would not be used there.

As I said in an earlier post, what if the traffickers intended to take the drugs to NZ instead of Australia?

Then NZ finds out the AFP has knowledge but didn't disclose it, we would then have a real circus.

Imagine the headlnes

" AFP assists drug ring to get drugs past Indonesian customs, and deliver them to NZ".

" AFP assist international drug smugglers, to protect their safety"

What an absolute hoot that would be.

It is all nonsense, people need to get a grip of reality, police can't be seen to be helping criminals carry out an illegal act.

Jeez people have lost the plot.
The papers would have a field day, it would be a bigger circus, than has happen to date.

Now that would be a real international incident, that would have global implications and ramifications, for Australia and the AFP.

SirRumpole · 1 May 2015

As I said in an earlier post, what if the traffickers intended to take the drugs to NZ instead of Australia?

Then NZ finds out the AFP has knowledge but didn't disclose it, we would then have a real circus.

NZ does not have the death penalty, so the AFP would have no problem tipping off NZ authorities who would arrest the drug mules when they entered NZ.

I think your analogy is a bit pear shaped.

sptrawler · 1 May 2015

SirRumpole said:
NZ does not have the death penalty, so the AFP would have no problem tipping off NZ authorities who would arrest the drug mules when they entered NZ.

I think your analogy is a bit pear shaped.

Obviously our perceptions are different, so be it.

One last question.
Should the trafficking of explosives or movement of suspected terrorists, go unreported by the AFP if it is through a country that carries the death penalty, for said offence?

McLovin · 1 May 2015

tech/a said:
Yes it is 100% and they would be the first to admit it.
I know exactly why and when it happened.

What was that you were saying about hindsight?

So many false equivalencies being tossed around in this thread. The drugs were being smuggled from Indonesia to Australia. There was no intention to sell or supply drugs in Indonesia by the criminal ring. The AFP had no operational reason to inform the Indonesians. If they felt it was good practise to let them know then it should have been referred to the AG and/or DFAT for approval. How the AFP would have reacted if someone was attempting to smuggle anthrax into Botswana is neither here nor there.

tech/a · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
What was that you were saying about hindsight?

Don't see the relevance of the comment.

I'm not wanting to fix something
Nor am I looking to apportion blame
or suggest things should have been
or even could have been different or
indeed that I want or
would like it to be different.

It is what it is.

tech/a · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
What was that you were saying about hindsight?

So many false equivalencies being tossed around in this thread. The drugs were being smuggled from Indonesia to Australia. There was no intention to sell or supply drugs in Indonesia by the criminal ring. The AFP had no operational reason to inform the Indonesians. If they felt it was good practise to let them know then it should have been referred to the AG and/or DFAT for approval. How the AFP would have reacted if someone was attempting to smuggle anthrax into Botswana is neither here nor there.

So lets get this right.
Shoe on the other foot

If drugs were being smuggled from AUST
(Take Corby for example---if they knew.)
to Indo and the Indonesians knew they
should not tell the AFP they should simply
arrest them at their end?

This is the craziest argument I've seen.
The AFP should have let known smuggling occur so they
would face a lighter penalty in the country they were bringing
the drugs too.

Beggars belief.

sptrawler · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
How the AFP would have reacted if someone was attempting to smuggle anthrax into Botswana is neither here nor there.

If Botswana had close economical, political and security ties with Australia, I would have thought it would be a requirement of the AFP to pass on any information, regarding international criminal activity.

If Australia had no political or economical ties, or the country was hostile toward Australia, one would think that information wouldn't be exchanged.

However if you have a reciprocal agreement, as I'm sure we will have with Indonesia and other countries, you would be obliged to inform them. IMO

We recently arrested suspected terrorists, on information passed to the AFP, from England.

McLovin · 1 May 2015

tech/a said:
If drugs were being smuggled from AUST
(Take Corby for example---if they knew.)
to Indo and the Indonesians knew they
should not tell the AFP they should simply
arrest them at their end?

Yes. Why not? The Indonesian authorities will act in their own self interest, as the AFP did in this instance. It just so happened that the interests of the AFP meant the execution of two Australians. Quid pro quo, I guess.

tech/a said:
This is the craziest argument I've seen.
The AFP should have let known smuggling occur so they
would face a lighter penalty in the country they were bringing
the drugs too.

Oh dear. The AFP did let smuggling occur. FFS, they wrote a letter to the Indonesians explaining the situation with the Bali 9 before some of them had even left Australia. They could have stopped them at the airport and charged them with conspiracy to import drugs.

On April 8, the same day Rush flew out of Australia, the AFP sent a letter to the Indonesian National Police, headed "Subject: Heroin couriers from Bali to Australia."

The letter, since tendered in evidence, set out in great detail what the AFP knew about the looming heroin importation.

Four couriers recruited by Nguyen and the accused organiser, Andrew Chan, had already left for Bali. Another three including Rush were due to leave Australia that day. They would return a week later with heroin in packs strapped to their legs and back. They had been instructed by the organisers to wear oversized clothes for concealment, avoid carrying metal so as not to set off airport detectors, and to bring back wooden carvings to declare to quarantine in order to bypass Customs. They had also been instructed not to smoke cigarettes for two weeks prior to travel as they would be unable to smoke on the return flight and the organisers didn't want them looking nervous.

The AFP letter requested the INP to attempt to keep the group under surveillance, identify the source of the drugs, and obtain as much evidence and intelligence as possible to help the AFP nail the organisers in Australia, other than Chan. The most crucial paragraph of the AFP letter advised the INP: "should they suspect that Chan and/or the couriers are in possession of drugs at the time of their departure, that they take what action they deem appropriate."

Four days later, on April 12, 2005, a second letter was sent by the AFP to their Indonesian counterparts, providing the dates, times and flight details of the group's return to Australia. Chan and four of the couriers were due to fly back to Australia on April 14, while Rush, Nguyen and Czugaj were due to fly two days later, on Saturday the 16th.

This letter, from the AFP's senior liaison officer in Bali, Paul Hunniford, advised: "If arrests are made [in Indonesia] on 14 April, it is likely that Nguyen, Czugaj and Rush will become suspicious of the arrest and decide not to attempt to board the Saturday flight with narcotics. I therefore request that you consider searching Nguyen, Czugaj and Rush soon after the first group are intercepted."

So let's see, two Australians dead another six in gaol for life and one out in 10 years. Did the AFP make any arrests in Australia in relation to this drug ring? Nope. Zero. Did the Indonesians arrest any locals in relation to this supply? Nope. Zero. What a whale of an operation. They should be proud.

tech/a · 1 May 2015

So let's see, two Australians dead another six in gaol for life and one out in 10 years. Did the AFP make any arrests in Australia in relation to this drug ring? Nope. Zero. Did the Indonesians arrest any locals in relation to this supply? Nope. Zero. What a whale of an operation. They should be proud

AND

Where are the drugs now?
Destroyed?
Doubt it.

McLovin · 1 May 2015

tech/a said:
AND

Where are the drugs now?
Destroyed?
Doubt it.

Well from the same article...

Aside from the AFP's role, there are many unanswered questions about the Indonesian police's handling of their end of the Bali Nine investigation, including why they failed to identify the source of the narcotics in Indonesia, as requested by the AFP. A Thai prostitute whom Chan is said to have used as a contact has reportedly disappeared, while a major heroin trafficker suspected of supplying the drugs was shot dead in a police raid in Jakarta, according to press reports. One theory - which remains unproven - is that corrupt Indonesian police may have had a hand in the deal.

I'll bet my bottom dollar that someone in the Indo police had a hand in this. You'd only hope the AFP weren't so naive that they actually ended up forwarding intelligence that went to those same police. I have serious doubts.

tech/a · 1 May 2015

Mc Lovin

We will hold differing views on this.

Not only did these guys attempt to import 8.5 kg of Heroin
but they also put other gullible kids in harms way.

They knew the risks.

tech/a · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
Well from the same article...

I'll bet my bottom dollar that someone in the Indo police had a hand in this. You'd only hope the AFP weren't so naive that they actually ended up forwarding intelligence that went to those same police. I have serious doubts.

That--we agree on.

sptrawler · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
Oh dear. The AFP did let smuggling occur. FFS, they wrote a letter to the Indonesians explaining the situation with the Bali 9 before some of them had even left Australia. They could have stopped them at the airport and charged them with conspiracy to import drugs..

Wasn't it you who recently posted, too many false equivalences are being made, then you write the above?

The AFP did not let smuggling occur, if they hadn't informed Indonesia, they would have.
When the group left Australia, they had not comitted any crime, they were suspected of plotting to do so.

They could not have stopped them at the airport, and charged them, if they had no proof, only suspicions.

Christ think of the outcry, if the AFP start arresting people at the airport, because they believe the subject is going overseas to commit a crime.
What is it 'innocent until proven guilty , unless it is in your best interest to be assumed guilty , before you commit a crime?

McLovin · 1 May 2015

sptrawler said:
When the group left Australia, they had not comitted any crime, they were suspected of plotting to do so.

Err, yes they have committed a crime. It's called conspiracy. The physical act doesn't need to have occurred. They also could have warned them off, as Rush's father requested. At the very least, don't tell the Indonesians what they're up to when they could face the death penalty.

sptrawler said:
Christ think of the outcry, if the AFP start arresting people at the airport, because they believe the subject is going overseas to commit a crime.
What is it 'innocent until proven guilty , unless it is in your best interest to be assumed guilty , before you commit a crime?

Being charged with a crime is not the same as being found guilty of a crime.

ETA: The CDPP has a whole section on it...

Section 11.5(1) of the Criminal Code states that a person who conspires with another person to commit an offence punishable by imprisonment for more than 12 months, or by a fine of 200 pu or more, is guilty of the offence of conspiracy to commit that offence and is punishable as if the offence to which the conspiracy relates had been committed. This section sets out the requirements for a finding of guilt for conspiracy (s 11.5(2)), the defences and situations when a person cannot be found guilty of conspiracy (s 11.5(4), (5)), and what will not be allowed as a defence (s 11.5(3)).

A court may nevertheless dismiss the charge for reasons of justice (s 11.5(6)). Proceedings for an offence of conspiracy must not be commenced without the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions. However, a person may be arrested for, charged with, or remanded in custody or on bail in connection with, an offence of conspiracy before the necessary consent has been given (s 11.5(8)).

sptrawler · 1 May 2015

McLovin said:
Err, yes they have committed a crime. It's called conspiracy. The physical act doesn't need to have occurred. They also could have warned them off, as Rush's father requested. At the very least, don't tell the Indonesians what they're up to when they could face the death penalty.

Being charged with a crime is not the same as being found guilty of a crime.

ETA: The CDPP has a whole section on it...

To charge someone, evidence other than hearsay, is required. Also the ringleaders had already left Australia.

I guess the whole argument is over, capital punishment, not the actions and responsibilities of anyone.

It would appear, if they had been jailed for life, there wouldn't be a problem.

Wysiwyg · 2 May 2015

tech/a said:
They knew the risks.

Yes and the consequence on the risk matrix if caught, is death. Also, our government protesting is dumb.

Tisme · 3 May 2015

McLovin said:
The physical act doesn't need to have occurred. They also could have warned them off, as Rush's father requested. ..

The old idea of policing and crime prevention had there day probably back in the seventies. The idea now is indignation driven catch them if you can and ping them (unless you are a Arab Muslim then you do a raid them in the calm hours and let them go so they know they are on the watch list).

When I was a kid, being caught when you thought you were invisible & clever was a BIG deterrent and a life's lesson. Nowdays it's bah humbug baby boomers, who got off with plenty of mispent youth, who bay for blood while talking themselves up as paragons of society and virtue. We have to stitch everyone up these days instead of letting human error creep into our stifling over governed society .... Australia is not the societal Australia it once was in the recent past.

chiff · 3 May 2015

Tisme said:
The old idea of policing and crime prevention had there day probably back in the seventies. The idea now is indignation driven catch them if you can and ping them (unless you are a Arab Muslim then you do a raid them in the calm hours and let them go so they know they are on the watch list).

When I was a kid, being caught when you thought you were invisible & clever was a BIG deterrent and a life's lesson. Nowdays it's bah humbug baby boomers, who got off with plenty of mispent youth, who bay for blood while talking themselves up as paragons of society and virtue. We have to stitch everyone up these days instead of letting human error creep into our stifling over governed society .... Australia is not the societal Australia it once was in the recent past.

I wonder what the attitude or judgement is on those that lost their lives in the Caboolture floodwaters.Apparently there were signs warning people not to enter floodwater-but they did.
Which of us has not taken a chance when we were warned otherwise,or the laws said otherwise?
How quick people are to rush to judgement.Or ,at the very least,selective in their judgement.

Tisme · 3 May 2015

chiff said:
Which of us has not taken a chance when we were warned otherwise,or the laws said otherwise?
.

On this discussion board I would predict only you, me and one other.

Execute or Rehabilitate Indonesian Style

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

sptrawler

SirRumpole

sptrawler

McLovin

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

sptrawler

McLovin

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

McLovin

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

tech/a

No Ordinary Duck

sptrawler

McLovin

sptrawler

Wysiwyg

Everyone wants money

Tisme

Apathetic at Best

chiff

Tisme

Apathetic at Best

Execute or Rehabilitate Indonesian Style

No Ordinary Duck

No Ordinary Duck

No Ordinary Duck

No Ordinary Duck

No Ordinary Duck

No Ordinary Duck

Everyone wants money

Apathetic at Best

Apathetic at Best

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency