A Primal Nut wrote: » So a more intelligent person would have stayed at home and allow the drug dealers to kill her whole family?
seamus wrote: » I think you're misreading most people's posts. It's possible to be pro-drugs, while at the same time calling someone an idiot for trying to smuggle drugs into a country notorious for its harsh anti-drugs penalties. I haven't seen many posts saying, "She's drug-smuggling scum and deserves to die", just a lot of people without much sympathy for her because her actions were monumentally dumb.
Madam_X wrote: » Why?
biko wrote: » “I would never have become involved in something like this but the lives of my children were in danger and I felt I had to protect them.” I don't get this part, how were the children in danger?
hyperborean wrote: » get dead
In another statement read out in court, her son Eliot said he believed his mother was forced into trafficking after a disagreement over rent money she paid on his behalf.
Cienciano wrote: » ...What normal woman that you know that's nearly 60 would be able to have the contacts to go to Indonesia to buy a few kg of cocaine? Definitely something dodgy going on
bucketybuck wrote: » It suits you to pretend that this was a poor grandmother who got caught with a little weed for personal use, but as per post #107 this is not really the case. She was a drug dealer. I have little sympathy for drug dealer, whether they are grandmothers or skinheads called Big Mike.
Biggins wrote: » See above again please! I also add the further - although it is by NO reason to justify her death - only to challenge the image she now wishes to portray herself as a sweet innocent English woman in retirement years:http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3664527.ece
BraziliaNZ wrote: » Yeah, we're aware of how stupid their laws are, and we're discussing them. I believe in rational and logical laws, this is why I am irked by this poor woman's plight. She's an idiot yes, but no one should be killed because of recreational drug handling.
bucketybuck wrote: » Well thats ok then. She was coerced, let her out immediately.
xwave7000 wrote: » What exactly am I trying to censor? Arguing a mundane point about another country's laws is redundant, so get off your high horse
xwave7000 wrote: » Where are you basing your allegations about the woman? Links?? Or is it just more internet hearsay?
Although Sandiford has been described as a “housewife from Gloucestershire” she is bettered remembered in Cheltenham as a “neighbour from Hell”. Mrs Sandiford was a single mother with two teenaged sons when she moved into a detached rented house on a quiet residential street on the outskirts of the town. The area was not quiet for long after her arrival, according to former neighbours. One 63-year-old man says he was constantly disturbed by a stream of visitors arriving in the residential street at all hours of the day and night. Others came demanding money she allegedly owed. He said: “Guys used to turn up in blacked out cars looking for money. They made a lot of racket with their coming and going. “She gives off the impression that she’s a well-to-do middle-aged woman, but she’s not at all. Her house was burgled because she borrowed money from someone and did not pay it back. From what I remember, they gutted the place. She’s the sort of person you would not want to live next door.” Other former neighbours claim police were always being called to the family home because of noisy domestic disputes between Ms Sandiford and her off-spring. Colin Richardson, her neighbour on the other side, said he was glad when the family left. He said: “I’m glad to see the back of her. She was totally the wrong sort of person in this sort of neighbourhood.” Mrs Sandiford packed up and left six years ago owing rent to the owners. Neighbours said the house was in such a state it took seven months before it could be let again.
folan wrote: » thats a hard line on drugs. wonder if Indonesia is winning the war on drugs?
Biggins wrote: » She was NO innocent woman by any means. A KNOWN persistent drug seller. Ye reap what you sow - and she sowed many a time. Now she is playing the all innocent because of her sons (one of whom has just been released from prison for aggravated violent burglary) - what a pathetic excuse. If things was that so called bad, they all could have moved back to England and sought protection to boot. Her excuses holds no water - just lies! The woman has said she was under extreme coercion. She in her defence could say all she wanted - if I was in her position, I would too.
Madam_X wrote: » The woman has said she was under extreme coercion which drove her to do this, but let's not let that get in the way of a good auld session of "I'll show everyone how no-nonsense and hardline I am." It has been documented that dangerous gangs force people to be their mules. However, the chance to say "Well I've no sympathy for her" and derivatives thereof is too good an opportunity for some to pass up. Christ, I'd rather be dead. You are not the censorship squad. People can criticise the death penalty if they want. Why? Because in this instance, it is. Lol, "deserves the death penalty" - how moderate of you. Re the rest of what you say: really depends on the drug, the quantity, the circumstances of those who will be buying it. E.g. hash ain't heroin.
bucketybuck wrote: » Thats how it is.
...the panel had decided on the maximum sentence for a number of reasons, including Sandiford’s convoluted evidence during her trial. Despite Sandiford’s protestations of innocence, a writer with extensive links within the Bali drugs world told The Times that she was a well-known drug dealer on the island. “Lindsay was known to traffic hashish into the island,” said Kathryn Bonella, whose new book Snowing in Bali examines in detail the tawdry world of narcotics dealers. “She used to bring it in from India and sell it on to one of my contacts, but had recently moved into cocaine,” she said. Ms Bonella added: “I know a number of big Western drug dealers who fled the island when they found out that she had been busted and was turning rat [co-operating with police].”
Madam_X wrote: » The woman has said she was under extreme coercion which drove her to do this, but let's not let that get in the way of a good auld session of "I'll show everyone how no-nonsense and hardline I am."
seanmacc wrote: » She won't be executed. Apparently they haven't executed anyone over there in years. She'll most probably end up on death row for the rest of her life though.
xwave7000 wrote: » Not for you or me to decide - I'm not going to argue about the death penalty in another country. Fact is it's in place. End of.
bucketybuck wrote: » Who are you to dictate to another country and another culture what approach they should take towards drugs? What an arrogant opinion that is.
Dravokivich wrote: » Give me the gun, the lethal injection or the trip switch for the electric chair. I'd execute her myself.
irishconvert wrote: » Why do you consider drug smugling less serious than murder or rape?
Do you not realise how many people's lives are destroyed by drugs, how many families are torn apart, how may crimes are comitted by drug addicts, how many people are murdered by drug dealing gangs? People involved in the distribution of class A drugs do an unbelieveable amount of damage to our society. Anyone involved in this business deserves the death penalty.
hyperborean wrote: » Haha, here comes the cavalry, I was wondering what side of the (bed)fense you would come out on.... Another internet hardman happy to see a person get dead for being a drug mule, the same hard man will be telling us next week that drug are GOOD mkay
hyperborean wrote: » Another internet hardman happy to see a person get dead for being a drug mule, the same hard man will be telling us next week that drug are GOOD mkay
Dravokivich wrote: » He used it correctly and then you go over the top and push more straw into your posts. Are you trying to prove him right?
seamus wrote: » When I say "kill the demand", I mean the demand for illegal drugs rather than legal ones. If you make illegal drugs legal, then 99% of people will buy them legally and the demand for illegal drugs is killed.
BraziliaNZ wrote: » But this could apply to everything. Everything kill us really. Bad food, booze, etc. I think at this stage we all know the war on drugs will be endless and can never work, other avenues must be explored. I don't really care though, as it's so available anyway that everyone can get anything whenever they want, at least where I live.
hyperborean wrote: » Alway gives me a giggle when the kids learn new words, This is after hours, you want to pretend you are clever go play in Politics or you could actually put some thought into the sentense of death being carried out on someone for being a drugs mule! Were does it end? do we kill the users as well?
