GUILTY Bali - Sheila von Wiese Mack, 62, found dead in suitcase, 12 Aug 2014 #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
It appears to me that the "rules" regarding trials in Indonesia are on a "we'll see" basis. Since we're only concentrating on foreigner cases that have attracted media attention, I would assume that the press is not particularly interested in regular local trials? Certainly not to the extent to hang around the courthouse to report on them daily.

I found it interesting with the trial of Neil Bantleman, that the public was banned from the courtroom due to the nature of the charges. Sexual assault on children. The judge just seemed to be making it up as they went along, eventually banning everyone from the courtroom, including the defendant's supporters and consulate officials.

One thing I did find interesting was that towards the end, the judge even forbade anyone from talking to the media to report on the trial. So it appears that the only time the media were getting information was when someone from inside the courtroom was telling them about the events of the day. Which would indicate to me that perhaps the press is prohibited from the courtroom at times. But it seems random. Maybe they just don't see the point of sitting in a courtroom all day? Waste of time? They can get highlights from someone from the public later? Not sure just how big the press is in Indonesia. There don't seem to be a lot of publications. All I've seen is the Jakarta Post and the Bali Times. And they don't seem very professional. And a few photographers who put their pics up on Getty or AP.

Also interesting to note, while the Bantleman trial has been over since mid February, the verdict is not expected until April.

http://blogs.wsj.com/indonesiarealt...ial-over-alleged-sex-abuse-at-jakarta-school/
 
I also remember reading somewhere that it would be to your benefit to have someone record the proceedings for you because there is no court reporter and no official transcript of any court proceedings (unreal I know). Perhaps the ability to record court proceedings has been removed since I read that blog for just that reason. Foreigners taking recorded video to their consulate reps to show how biased some of these trials likely are.

Wouldn't surprise me then if the media was not permitted to report on trials once they got underway. Maybe it depends on the sitting judges. I'd imagine the corrupt ones wouldn't want any record of any court proceedings to come back to bite them.

What a system. Again, there are nicer beaches in less corrupt places. Although pretty rare in that part of the world I realize. Wonder if it's just as bad in Fiji? :waitasec:

MOO
 
ajaylee said:
First day of witnesses, I think, and we actually did get a few details. The only thing of note (to me) is:



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-bali-murder-trial-20150226-story.html
Click to expand...

Thanks. This article tells some of what is going on in the courtroom.

I have always wondered if anyone in the hotel rooms next door to them heard a ruckus.

Oh no! It's going to be hard to prove Heather was involved in the actual killing of her mother when Heather's denying being in the room. Tommy's going to go down for her. I have no doubt it was all her idea from the start. Very disturbing if she gets away with it and Tommy takes on the whole crime. How do they prove she took part in the actual killing?


Bellboy testifies at Bali murder trial
Bali hotel bellboy testifies in murder trial: "They refused when I offered to help put the bag into the taxi"
February 26, 2015, 11:49 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-bali-murder-trial-20150226-story.html
 
SouthAussie said:
We did have a lot of reporting on Schapelle's case. We definitely had reporters in Bali for the trial. Though it is not clear that they got their info directly from attending the trial (which is one of the reasons why I am not sure if reporters are allowed into the courtroom). But they were able to report what was happening within a day or so of it having happened, sometimes on the same day.

Eg. This article from 5th March 2005 includes proceedings from 2 days prior, on 3rd March.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2005/03/04/1109700677359.html

But it is nothing like the reporting that we are accustomed to about the day-to-day proceedings in trials on our home soil. And gives more of an overview, than specific ongoing detail.

This report gives a lot of reference links to trial info mentioned in the report. It is not clear where a lot of the referenced info originally came from though.
http://www.schapelle.net/appendix1.html

One interesting thing that cropped up during Schapelle's trial - during the sentencing phase, one of the judges was seen reading a book called "Life Imprisonment" during the proceedings. :thud:
Click to expand...

Very interesting and very helpful post SouthAussie.

I read the Sydney Morning Herald piece and found I useful. But I would add this:


--First and most important, it is not a contemporaneous account of a day in court. It is a retrospective account of the case, beginning before her arrest.

--It is not something which was published the day of court proceedings or the day after. That is what is expected if a reporter is in actually in the courtroom.

--What I am looking for are press accounts of specific days in court. Assuming that any given court session generally takes place over several hours, I would expect such a press account to highlight several specific things which happened, likely including at least one specific question and several specific quoted answers. In a court session devoted to prosecution evidence, one would normally expect that the report would at least to a certain extent be damaging to the defendant.

--It reads like a defense brief, not like a journalist’s report of legal proceedings. This doesn’t make it bad journalism, but I do think the article is really something different from news. It is a kind of commentary which aims to prove Schapelle is innocent.

--I suspect that the scraps of info about direct happenings in the court came from Schapelle’s family or her lawyers.

You, yourself, have pointed some of these things out, so I'm not so much arguing with you, but rather thinking out loud.
 
Kamille and SouthAussie have recently made several important and useful posts with ideas about the nature of press coverage in Indonesia. They have been stimulating and I thank them.

I remain confused as to what the rules are.

However, I still conclude this: Heather and Tommy's trial coverage in the press do not appear unusual compared to the cases we have been discussing. So at the very least, I don't think we can conclude that bribery is what keeps us from getting reports every day they go into court.

That suggestion of bribery for press silence is what got me looking into past trials.
 
ajaylee said:
First day of witnesses, I think, and we actually did get a few details. The only thing of note (to me) is:



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-bali-murder-trial-20150226-story.html
Click to expand...

News!

And more evidence that there is no case to make for bribery being a source of silence in this case.

This is, however, evidence against my tentative theory that reporters are not allowed in the courtroom.

I'm so glad to see evidence that I'm wrong on that, because it's great to get news of the trials.
 
I am confused by the news today from Tommy’s trial. When Heather phoned the Sun-Times (after phoning the Chicago Tribune and Judge Cohen’s chambers), the Sun-Times reported:

Mack said she is in court two days a week, and the trial is going slowly.

“There are 41 witnesses,” she said, “and we’ve gone through two.”​

http://www.fox4news.com/story/28023373/us-teen-on-trial-for-moms-death-in-indonesia-petrified

This was on February 4.

--Wasn’t the first witness the taxi driver, and didn’t we see a photo of the suitcase which presumably was used during his testimony? Wasn’t this on February 4?

--Are they in court one day a week (presumably Wednesday) or two days a week (Wednesday and perhaps Thursday)?

--If they are always in court on Wednesdays and another day, why have we only seen Wednesday photos up until today? (There was a photo of them today.)

--Did Heather’s trial start on February 4 and Tommy’s trial start only today?

--If so, why? Doesn’t that mean witnesses have to come to court on two different days, first to testify against one defendant and later to testify against the other?

--If witnesses testify twice with a day or more between the two appearances, does this give one of the defendants an edge, because he or she will have had more time to prepare a response to the witness testimony?

--If Tommy’s trial only started today, why have we seen pictures of him since the 4th of this month going to court? Do each of the defendants have a right or an obligation to be present at the trial of the other? Is this because they are both accused of the same crime, but with slightly different charges?

--Even I have to ask (and this will make Kamille smile): if Heather’s trial started on the 4th, and if reporters are allowed in the court room, why haven’t there been reports of her trial days? Am I the only one who thinks it highly unlikely that the Associated Press can be bribed not to cover a trial?

--Was the AP reporter actually in the court room today, or did the information come from one of the parties? Are Heather's lawyers providing details to the press of Tommy's trial to deflect attention from Heather?

--The AP story contains reports of testimony which puts both defendants in a bad light (there are references to Heather), so doesn't this suggest that there is not a concerted effort to protect her in the press? But then, again, why no reports from the previous court sessions? Were those court sessions Heather's trial?

This case has elements which totally confuse me.
 
Orange Tabby said:
Re: coverage of Schapelle: I don't deny that there were lots of media reports. I mention numerous examples of the coverage in my post. My point is this: can you point to any press report which specifically covers any of the days in court that includes contemporaneous accounts of the witnesses testimony or the specific evidence against her? I haven't found them.

I should add that I found that absence utterly astounding.
Click to expand...

I wasn't arguing Orange Tabby, merely stating what I am aware of and the cases of Australians that I had paid a bit more attention such as Michelle and Leeza most recently that did go quiet. I was too young to pay much attention to the trials of the Bali 9. I do remember Schapelle being on the news often, but not of the specific content so no cannot answer your question.

I don't have time to sit around and prove unimportant observations. It was an observation that I made that it "seems" to go quiet in the media and then you hear about lenient sentences. That is it. Simple as that. I have nothing further to add to this conversation.
 
Well, here is yet another slant on the reporting angle. Indonesian authorities are about to deport an Aussie Daily Mail journalist, Candace Sutton, who is in Indonesia to cover the Andrew Chan/Myuran Sukumaran pending executions, as she did not have a journalist visa nor had she obtained the required recommendation documents from the foreign affairs ministry.

They have also deported two other journalists, Gomes Marcio of Brazil and Geovanne Percy Siama Guerrero of Peru, for conducting journalistic activities while only having ordinary tourist visas.

I wonder how difficult it is to obtain a journalist visa and the required recommendation documents from the foreign affairs ministry? And does the level of difficulty depend on what you are in Indonesia to report on?

http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/9...n-authorities-to-deport-australian-journalist
 
As well as a bucketload of requirements to get a journalist visa for Indonesia, conditions also state this ...

- We advise you to engage with a local partner in Indonesia to assist with your project and permit paperwork.
- Please note that, in certain areas/districts, you may be required to involve local crew as a supporting team appointed by the Directorate of Film of the Ministry of Tourism.
- Please note that decision of approval by authorities in Indonesia will take approximately 6 weeks after receipt of the completed aforementioned requirements.

http://www.embassyofindonesia.org/wordpress/?page_id=700
 
Bugbear said:
Bali Monitor sought for Trust Fund

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-bali-trust-allegations-met-20150227-story.html

"Cook County judge overseeing the daughter's $1.56 million trust fund is being urged to set tighter controls amid concerns of alleged corruption in the Indonesian legal system."
Click to expand...

This is excellent. Not only is more attention being drawn to the case in Chicago, WW's trying to get more attention in Bali by asking for a Bali monitor. This is the kind of attention Soenardi and the judges really don't need or want right now.

Aside from the corruption issues getting attention in Bali now, there's the potential fall-out from the MS/AC situation. If the President backs down (and I can't believe he won't) and overturns the death penalty for these two, his pride is going to be wounded and he's going to be worried about his image: looking weak on the international front and to his people. He may respond by making certain (behind the scenes, of course) that judges will be particularly harsh on foreigners in the next few trials.

eta: !!! Did that link get updated after I made my post?

Cohen won't acknowledge corruption concerns and rebuffed WW - his attorney almost got cited for contempt! Meanwhile, Soenardi emailed a letter saying HM is suicidal and depressed, unpaid hospital bills are piling up, she's afraid she'll have to give birth in her cell and that Soenardi will walk out on her because he's not being paid. No mention of the itemized bill review, but the judge/trustee OK'd $25K to Soenardi (in addition to the $50K he has already received).

I recall one story of corruption where the lawyer said it was 'lobbying'. I wonder if there were any itemized charges for 'lobbying'.

I'd like to see HM take a tantrum time-out for a week or two now, then come back to trial. That would get her closer to her due date earlier in the trial. She won't have the same leverage after Stella is born, because people will be able to separate the interests of mother and child.
 
Aww so HM's lawyer reports to the judge in Chicago that HM is feeling suicidal over her fears that she will not get the money she wants for her lawyer and the baby's birth.

Somebody needs to tell the poor darling that the only person who loved her and would be bothered by her death is the person she helped to brutally murder.
 
ajaylee said:
eta: !!! Did that link get updated after I made my post?
Click to expand...

Lol It did change - Headline and all! Someone arrived back at their office w/ notes :)
I would not accept Soenardi's word either, as she seems to be able to speak for herself when she wants to. She has been in touch w/ Scifo almost daily - Scifo for the $48K can surely give a message for his fee I would think.
 
Bugbear said:
Lol It did change - Headline and all! Someone arrived back at their office w/ notes :)
I would not accept Soenardi's word either, as she seems to be able to speak for herself when she wants to. She has been in touch w/ Scifo almost daily - Scifo for the $48K can surely give a message for his fee I would think.
Click to expand...

Is she doing an end-run around Scifo or did Scifo put her up to it?
 
ajaylee said:
Is she doing an end-run around Scifo or did Scifo put her up to it?
Click to expand...

Scifo originally wanted to bail out of the mess but he was denied & has since had a change of heart in the tune of the $48K. If Sciofo & HM speak daily, he is handling HM's Chancery Case here, certainly he would petition for HM's state of mind to get funds to her. It probably should not have come from Soenardi in a letter along with his bills.

Here is the ongoing Chancery Case here in Chicago. It was last updated 02/25/15.
https://w3.courtlink.lexisnexis.com/cookcounty/FindDock.asp?NCase=&SearchType=2&Database=3&case_no=&Year=&div=&caseno=&PLtype=1&sname=Heather+Mack&CDate=
 
According to the article, the email was sent to the trustee. I presume this means Mackoff.

When Mack tried to go directly to the judge and then the media, she was doing an end-run around attorneys, telling the judge's clerk that she had no legal representation at all, which was a complete lie.

I know she's in regular contact with Scifo, but she bypassed him once before when she didn't think he (and Elkin and Favia, at the time) were moving quickly enough. I'm wondering if this was another attempt to bypass her attorney and plead her case directly to Mackoff. Well, indirectly, through Soenardi. The fact that Soenardi sent the email (sure sounds like HM wrote it, not Soenardi) leads me to wonder if he doesn't entirely trust HM - or perhaps he just thinks she's not pushing hard enough.

Or perhaps she couldn't find a phone number for Mackoff!

He may also realize that she loses a lot of emotional leverage once her child is born and can be protected independent of HM.
 
I wonder if anyone has presented Judge Cohen with the reality of what Indonesian lawyers earn on a monthly basis. Would be interesting to know the entirety of what was in that affidavit from the Northwestern University political science professor. Good on William Wiese’s attorney for getting an official document that speaks clearly of the corruption in the Indonesian police and court systems.

Of course there is no ‘evidence’ of bribery! When is bribery ever going to be evident?? It usually takes sting operations, confessions, or investigations after the fact, to unearth things like bribery.
I guess Judge Cohen is stepping as cautiously as he can, without denying Heather the funds that she is unfortunately legally entitled to. :gaah:
Wouldn't have hurt to put a monitor in place, though. But I guess that may insinuate that Mackoff is not up to the job.

I am glad to see that he said this though ….

Calling the letter "emotional blackmail" to extract trust money, Cohen reiterated his earlier ruling that the money was to be released in three increments after Soenardi provided detailed billing statements.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-bali-trust-allegations-met-20150227-story.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 67 more.
Total: 266 (members: 68, guests: 198)

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
198
Total visitors
266
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,160
Messages
18,250,288
Members
234,549
Latest member
raymehay
Back
Top