Corby Case - What should I think?

I find it hard to know what to think about the Corby case. I am always leery of pundits who decide what the proper outcome of a trial should have been when they were not in the court watching proceedings. However, it is somewhat of a surprise to hear that the head judge has never acquitted anyone on a drugs charge. There is no doubt that asian legal systems are different from our.

(I seem to recall reading that the Japanese system is somewhat similar, in that it is a virtual given that if you are charged with a crime you will be found guilty. I presume most oriental based systems would be somewhat similar. I stand to be corrected by any reader who knows better.)

I know they say the Indonesian system is based on the European system. But I assume that European judges would not have the same strike rate as our Indonesian friend.

What I do know about the English criminal trial system, and what has bothered me for years, is that it is not philosophically based on any sense of an objective search for truth. It is more about the game than the truth, I think.

Put it this way: the judge will instruct the jury that it is all about what can be proved beyond reasonable doubt (BRD). Not only that, it is about whether the Prosecutor has presented sufficient to establish an offence BRD.

There is no role here for the judiciary to push an investigation or the presentation of evidence along any particular line or direction, even if certain lines of enquiry may well be what a judge or jury, interested in knowing what really happened , would like to see pursued.

It is my understanding that the European system is more philosophically inclined to the objective sense of finding out what happened, and to my mind that can only be a good thing.

However, you'll be hard pressed to find a lawyer in Australia (at least in private practice) who has given much thought about this. I think that is because they quickly become part of the game and gamesmanship of our system, and then cannot see the wood for the trees.

UPDATE:

I thought Media Watch did a pretty good job last night on the media circus around the Corby case. Its the first edition since Ms Jackson took over that seemed to have some real meat to it. I was particularly amused at the John Laws phone call segment.

Tim Blair provides a very useful service by pointing out that even under Indonesian law, the sentence is harsh. I guess it sounds worthwhile appealing after all. (I was worried about the outcry if her sentence was increased on appeal!)

Oh, and "inquisitorial" is the phrase I was looking for to describe the european criminal law system. As opposed to adversarial english based system.