Saturday, 28 May 2005

This afternoon Sarah took me out to high tea at the Hyatt to celebrate the end of all my assignments because we haven't been able to spend a lot of time together lately because of them. It was a lovely surprise and the food was delicious.

So, she's been found guilty of drug importation and copped 20 years?

Do I think she's guilty? Of stupidity, definitely, if all the reports are accurate. Of drug trafficking, I'm not convinced.

I remember seeing footage of her months ago when she was first arrested, being dragged into court laughing. In a country with the death penalty for drug trafficking, it's no laughing matter under any circumstances. Apparently she tried to stop the customs officials from opening her bag. Apparently she admitted to the drugs being hers. I don't know about the validity of either. If it's true, then it reinforces the stupidity charge.

What I will say is that there is no way in the world I would holdiay in a country with such a fucked up judicial system. Apparently they didn't fingerprint the bag of drugs - because the customs officials had all handled it after they found it, so it was pointless. Had proper forensic process been followed, perhaps they could have connected the bag of drugs to a baggage handler in Sydney airport.

In Australia, you're innocent until proven guilty, and you only have to prove reasonable doubt. Sure, she had the drugs in a bag in her possession. A judge would take a very dim view of the lack of forensic process followed though, once it was discovered.

If the allegations of Sydney airport baggage handlers doing dodgey stuff (perhaps strengthened by something concrete) didn't equate to a bit of reasonable doubt, I don't know what would.

So whether she's guilty or not, I think she deserved a better trial and handling of her case.

I think Australians should vote with their feet. Don't holiday in a country where you are at risk of not receiving justice if you fall fowl of the law - even by accident.