brit faces firing squad the A.A grumpy column

Post by **pantoandy** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:37 am

hello and welcome to another wet cold and miserable bank holday grumps column

this week the story of samantha orobator has been getting up my nose .

but i,ll save my scathing wrath for the end piece.

British officials and legal campaigners are battling to help a British woman who faces death by firing squad in Laos if convicted of drug smuggling

Samantha Orobator could face execution if found guilty.

Samantha Orobator from south London was arrested last August after she was allegedly caught with 1.5lb (680g) of heroin.

The 20 year old, who is five months pregnant, had been told her trial would start on Monday but it has been postponed.

Despite being in custody for nine months it is understood she has yet to speak to a lawyer.

The British vice-consul in Bangkok in neighbouring Thailand flew out to Laos on Sunday to check on her.

An embassy spokesman said: "We are trying very hard to ensure that she does have good legal representation."

Lawyer Anna Morris from legal rights charity Reprieve also flew into the country after permission was granted to meet Orobator on Tuesday.

The charity said she made contact with their office in London by telephone to say she had been told she will appear in court today.

But Ms Morris told Sky News: "We have been told the trial will not take place today. It could take place tomorrow, but the trial has no fixed date."

Reprieve said the trial has been brought forward, the suspicion being it had been done to stop Orobator getting proper legal representation.

Phonthong prison, where she is being held, is notorious, with a reputation for beatings and brutality.

Orobator is understood to have been arrested in Laos on her way back to the UK.

Smuggling more than 500g of heroin carries a mandatory death sentence in the east Asian country.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World- ... ring_Squad

AAG

personally my sympathy for this drug smuggler is zero.

she became pregnant while in custody hopefully to evade the firing squad.

if you break the law abroad you are subject to that countries penalties and heroin is one of the worst drugs that you can smuggle.

well done to the laos authorties for preventing another load of heroin hitting the streets in the uk .

the do gooders are trying to save orobators life if they do it sends the wrong message to the drug smugglers that if you are caught smuggling drugs abroad then help will be available to avoid a death sentence.

to me the death sentence should be the deterrant that doesnt make you want to take the risk because you know if you are caught you will die.

orobator knew what she was doing when she boarded that plane to the uk with the heroin but she got caught and the do gooders should not interfere with laos justice and our political orators should not make this an international incident.

hopefully justice will take its course although postponed untill after the baby is born and orobator faces the firing squad.

we need to stamp out drugs not just here in the uk but worldwide and if it means that a drug smuggler faces execution ce/la/vie

AAG

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:46 am

You don't know she is a drug smuggler because she hasn't actually had a trial yet or indeed even has a chance to speak to a lawyer. The trial has been brought forward a YEAR. She is in a prison notorious for it's brutality and has been since august 2008 and is now five months pregnant.

What makes you think she got pregnant deliberately or even had a choice in whether she had sex or not?

Post by **pantoandy** » Mon May 04, 2009 10:49 am

she was caught trying to board a plane to the uk with a load of heroin

i stick by my opinion that orobator knew what she was doing when she boarded that plane to the uk with the heroin but she got caught and the do gooders should not interfere with laos justice and our political orators should not make this an international incident.

hopefully justice will take its course although postponed untill after the baby is born and orobator faces the firing squad.

we need to stamp out drugs not just here in the uk but worldwide and if it means that a drug smuggler faces execution ce/la/vie my sympathy is a big fat ZERO

AAG

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:02 am

gmc;1183537 wrote: You don't know she is a drug smuggler because she hasn't actually had a trial yet or indeed even has a chance to speak to a lawyer. The trial has been brought forward a YEAR. She is in a prison notorious for it's brutality and has been since august 2008 and is now five months pregnant.

What makes you think she got pregnant deliberately or even had a choice in whether she had sex or not? The report is a little sketchy on details but i'm inclined to agree with Andy. Regardless of the conditions of the prison she is in, i doubt that she would have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing. They must have found the heroin on her to detain her.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:36 am

oscar;1183548 wrote: The report is a little sketchy on details but i'm inclined to agree with Andy. Regardless of the conditions of the prison she is in, i doubt that she would have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing. They must have found the heroin on her to detain her.

In that case you should hand yourself over to the police immediately and go to prison for what you did. Quite clearly, in your own particular case, you would not have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing. It's a travesty of justice that you were allowed to appeal and have your conviction overturned when the police were only doing their job. We can't afford to have middle aged matrons that get off on attacking helpless teenagers walking the streets with impunity laughing at the police and denigrating that fine body upholding the law.

You surprise me oscar you really do. Just because someone has been arrested does NOT mean they are guilty. Your own experiences should surely have taught that how dangerous such an assumption can be and that human rights concerns are not just a trick to make life easy for criminals.

She hasn't had a trial, no evidence has been presented and the heroin could easily have been planted by the police, you just don't know what happened.

Being held without trial is bad enough, being raped and made pregnant as well must be like living in a nightmare you can't waken from.

You two are really a pair of offensive idiots way beyond the pale so far as I'm concerned. Join the BNP -you clearly have the kind of simplistic moronic attitudes and the perspicacity of a plank of wood that would let you fit in.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 11:49 am

gmc;1183578 wrote: In that case you should hand yourself over to the police immediately and go to prison for what you did. Quite clearly, in your own particular case, you would not have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing. It's a travesty of justice that you were allowed to appeal and have your conviction overturned when the police were only doing their job. We can't afford to have middle aged matrons that get off on attacking helpless teenagers walking the streets with impunity laughing at the police and denigrating that fine body upholding the law.

You surprise me oscar you really do. Just because someone has been arrested does NOT mean they are guilty. Your own experiences should surely have taught that how dangerous such an assumption can be and that human rights concerns are not just a trick to make life easy for criminals.

She hasn't had a trial, no evidence has been presented and the heroin could easily have been planted by the police, you just don't know what happened.

Being held without trial is bad enough, being raped and made pregnant as well must be like living in a nightmare you can't waken from.

You two are really a pair of offensive idiots way beyond the pale so far as I'm concerned. Join the BNP -you clearly have the kind of simplistic moronic attitudes and the perspicacity of a plank of wood that would let you fit in. Bad day at the sporran factory?

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Mon May 04, 2009 12:06 pm

I think that the matter in contention here is that Orobator receives proper legal representation which is her due, guilty or not. I have not personally seen the evidence to say whether she's guilty or not and I doubt that the journalists have either. Can there be absolute certainty that the officials involved did not contain at least one corrupt element?

abbey · Post by **abbey** » Mon May 04, 2009 1:02 pm

gmc;1183578 wrote: In that case you should hand yourself over to the police immediately and go to prison for what you did. Quite clearly, in your own particular case, you would not have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing. It's a travesty of justice that you were allowed to appeal and have your conviction overturned when the police were only doing their job. We can't afford to have middle aged matrons that get off on attacking helpless teenagers walking the streets with impunity laughing at the police and denigrating that fine body upholding the law.

You surprise me oscar you really do. Just because someone has been arrested does NOT mean they are guilty. Your own experiences should surely have taught that how dangerous such an assumption can be and that human rights concerns are not just a trick to make life easy for criminals.

She hasn't had a trial, no evidence has been presented and the heroin could easily have been planted by the police, you just don't know what happened.

Being held without trial is bad enough, being raped and made pregnant as well must be like living in a nightmare you can't waken from.

You two are really a pair of offensive idiots way beyond the pale so far as I'm concerned. Join the BNP -you clearly have the kind of simplistic moronic attitudes and the perspicacity of a plank of wood that would let you fit in.
:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:02 pm

gmc;1183578 wrote: She hasn't had a trial, no evidence has been presented and the heroin could easily have been planted by the police, you just don't know what happened.

Being held without trial is bad enough, being raped and made pregnant as well must be like living in a nightmare you can't waken from.

While we don't know all the details yet, I an inclined to agree with you gmc. Back in the 80s I remember several cases where white westerners had drugs 'planted' on them by the police in order to make their quota of drug arrests and to avoid implicating local drug lords.

I also agree that conditions then were allegedly so appalling that anyone detained would have no choice in any of their treatment, including being raped, and I can't believe the conditions would have changed much since then.

As a btw, I wonder what will happen to the baby? I doubt she would want to keep it but if it were left in Laos I imagine it would probably suffer a brutal life, particularly being half white. :-1

Rapunzel · Post by **Rapunzel** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:04 pm

okay, so not half white

Pregnant Briton Samantha Orobator faces death penalty in Laos - Times Online

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:23 pm

Rapunzel;1183637 wrote: okay, so not half white

Pregnant Briton Samantha Orobator faces death penalty in Laos - Times Online

As i said in my first post, the details are rather sketchy. While gmc is quick to assume that she was raped in prison, he condemns anyone for assuming she was trying to smuggle heroin. When the details are so sketchy, it is hypocritical to object to Andy and my post assuming her guilt when he has no hard evidence that she was raped in prison. Pot, kettle and black spring to mind. It says in your article Rapunzel that there is no evidence as yet that she was raped so at the moment, we are all in the dark.

If she has been fitted up by the authorities and raped in prison then she has my deepest sympathy. We will not know for certain until more details are released. If she did try smuggling the heroin then i stand by what i said that i'm inclined to agree with Andy. The main word in all of this is 'IF'.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Mon May 04, 2009 2:48 pm

oscar;1183646 wrote: As i said in my first post, the details are rather sketchy. While gmc is quick to assume that she was raped in prison, he condemns anyone for assuming she was trying to smuggle heroin. wWhen the details are so sketchy, it is hypocritical to object to Andy and my post assuming her guilt hen he has no hard evidence that she was raped in prison. Pot, kettle and black spring to mind. It says in your article Rapunzel that there is no evidence as yet that she was raped so at the moment, we are all in the dark.

If she has been fitted up by the authorities and raped in prison then she has my deepest sympathy. We will not know for certain until more details are released. If she did try smuggling the heroin then i stand by what i said that i'm inclined to agree with Andy. The main word in all of this is 'IF'.

Then by the same logic it would be hypocritical to criticise gmc. Would it not be better just to demand that she be given a proper trial before appointing ourselves judge, jury and excecutioner ?

We, in this country, have this system of innocent untill proven guilty for a very good reason. Because we believe it is a persons right to be innocent untill proven guilty. That is the basis of our sense of right and decency

We shouldnt be employing trial by forum

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 3:08 pm

Snowfire;1183662 wrote: Then by the same logic it would be hypocritical to criticise gmc. Would it not be better just to demand that she be given a proper trial before appointing ourselves judge, jury and excecutioner ?

We, in this country, have this system of innocent untill proven guilty for a very good reason. Because we believe it is a persons right to be innocent untill proven guilty. That is the basis of our sense of right and decency

We shouldnt be employing trial by forum
First of all..... it is Oscar's duty under British law and the Labour government to critisize gmc. It was what i was put on this earth to do as he also seems to have a way of following my posts. However that's because secretely, he wants me. When Scotland closes for the night and i can't sleep, i then have to turn my attention to annoying the daylights out of Nomad and if you don't stop encouraging gmc, i shall start on you :p Critising gmc is the local sport here in Bristol and i am the Chairman.

Yes of course she should have a proper trial. However, you hit the nail on the head when you said 'In this country have the system of innocent until proven guilty'. There is the problem..... she is NOT in this country. She was caught allegedly in another country in another continent with different laws and systems. What you are in effect saying is that their law and system is acceptable until it happens to be a British citizen.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Mon May 04, 2009 3:16 pm

oscar;1183678 wrote: First of all..... it is Oscar's duty under British law and the Labour government to critisize gmc. It was what i was put on this earth to do as he also seems to have a way of following my posts. However that's because secretely, he wants me. When Scotland closes for the night and i can't sleep, i then have to turn my attention to annoying the daylights out of Nomad and if you don't stop encouraging gmc, i shall start on you :p Critising gmc is the local sport here in Bristol and i am the Chairman.

Yes of course she should have a proper trial. However, you hit the nail on the head when you said 'In this country have the system of innocent until proven guilty'. There is the problem..... she is NOT in this country. She was caught allegedly in another country in another continent with different laws and systems. What you are in effect saying is that their law and system is acceptable until it happens to be a British citizen.

No thats not what I'm saying. We dont discard our values because the crime was commited in another country. We should still hold on to the premise that she is innocent untill proven guilty, even though the chances of that are slim.

If she was given that fair trial and found guilty, I have no problem in her being given the full term of what would be appropriate in Laos. It is then that we can say "she should have known the consequences "

As for gmc "wanting you" Is that subliminal ? Do you have a recording playing while he sleeps ? I'd turn the volume up if I were you cos I dont see any lust posted here :yh_rotfl

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 3:21 pm

Snowfire;1183685 wrote: No thats not what I'm saying. We dont discard our values because the crime was commited in another country. We should still hold on to the premise that she is innocent untill proven guilty, even though the chances of that are slim.

If she was given that fair trial and found guilty, I have no problem in her being given the full term of what would be appropriate in Laos. It is then that we can say "she should have known the consequences "

As for gmc "wanting you" Is that subliminal ? Do you have a recording playing while he sleeps ? I'd turn the volume up if I were you cos I dont see any lust posted here :yh_rotfl
Great Gordon Brown's Snowrash.... i agree with you. She should have had the right to a British lawyer in the first instance and maybe then we'd know more on the subject.

You don't see the lust because your a bloke. Us women know lust when we see it. I read between the lines of gmc posts and then make some-thing entirely different up which is my perogative as a woman.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon May 04, 2009 4:03 pm

Oscrash: gmc is totally correct.

"If....."

Remember how you have been fooled. You made judgements on the basis of a short term emotional response to the words "heroin smuggler" and completely divorced your own experience of police malpractice from that. Don't forget it. Again.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 4:10 pm

Clodhopper;1183704 wrote: Oscrash: gmc is totally correct.

"If....."

Remember how you have been fooled. You made judgements on the basis of a short term emotional response to the words "heroin smuggler" and completely divorced your own experience of police malpractice from that. Don't forget it. Again. Look Clodploppy, if you read back, it was me who said the big question was 'IF' not gmc...... he is assuming that she is pregnant because she has been raped in prison yet there is no evidence of that as yet. Andy and i are assuming that she is guilty of smuggling heroin of which there is no proof as yet.

IF she is guilty then it's no good crying to the British legal system because she doesn't like the system of the country she was caught in. IF she has been fitted up then she has my sympathies.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon May 04, 2009 4:41 pm

Oscrakers: No. I use the "If" as a way of saying that the assumption that the police had a good reason for arresting, and not just making their targets, is very dangerous. Of course we all want to see heroin smugglers clobbered. The question in this case is whether she was a heroin smuggler or merely a dupe.

Should she be killed if she had drugs planted in her luggage, whether by the police or real smugglers?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon May 04, 2009 4:58 pm

Clodhopper;1183716 wrote: Oscrakers: No. I use the "If" as a way of saying that the assumption that the police had a good reason for arresting, and not just making their targets, is very dangerous. Of course we all want to see heroin smugglers clobbered. The question in this case is whether she was a heroin smuggler or merely a dupe.

Should she be killed if she had drugs planted in her luggage, whether by the police or real smugglers? Her relatives say she is a smart girl. My brother travels to Thailand regually and has his own little ritual for checking his luggage before and after boarding. If she was as smart as her relatives say, she must have been smart enough to know if she was being duped. Getting duped at airports especially to the East is something that is heavilly advertised and we even had a tv campaign some years back. The truth is that i doubt we will ever know the truth. Let's face it..... many who have been caught in Thailand have pulled the 'I was duped' trick and for many it has worked when the British Embassy stepped in. She's hardly going to admit it with the death penalty hovering over her is she? There are unscrupulous dealers out there who do prey on young women as mules. I suppose we will just have to wait for more reports.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:05 pm

So you are saying she should be shot IF we can't be sure if she was stupid or not?

Do you really think the con jobs of the criminals don't get more sophisticated?

She should - surely- have access to decent legal representation?

Post by **Peter Lake** » Mon May 04, 2009 5:44 pm

Clodhopper;1183733 wrote: So you are saying she should be shot IF we can't be sure if she was stupid or not?

Do you really think the con jobs of the criminals don't get more sophisticated?

She should - surely- have access to decent legal representation? She should have British legal representation and a fair trial. If after a fair trial it should show there is unquestionable proof that she deliberately smuggled the drugs in, the she must face the law of that country. If there is the slightest doubt, she should be brought home.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue May 05, 2009 1:53 am

posted by panto andy

personally my sympathy for this drug smuggler is zero.

she became pregnant while in custody hopefully to evade the firing squad.

Just because someone is arrested does not make them guilty. Ask Oscar to explain it to you, she might just possibly be able to grasp the concept of innocent till proven guilty and the need for a fair trial and the right to appeal a judgement. She might even have the glimmering of an understanding that human rights and little things like the right tio a fairv trial is not do gooders getting in the way of fine upstanding police forces around the world clearing the street of the riff raff.

To suggest that someone on prison on trial for their life would get pregnant just to get out of it is a leap of demented logic straight out of the right wing nutters guide to stupidity that beggar belief.

Posted by oscar

While gmc is quick to assume that she was raped in prison, he condemns anyone for assuming she was trying to smuggle heroin. When the details are so sketchy, it is hypocritical to object to Andy and my post assuming her guilt when he has no hard evidence that she was raped in prison. Pot, kettle and black spring to mind. It says in your article Rapunzel that there is no evidence as yet that she was raped so at the moment, we are all in the dark.

On balance i would put it to you that she was more likely raped than she felt the need for a bit if rumpy pumpy to help pass the time and was silly enough to forget she might get pregnant.

You are quite ready to assume her guilt in drug smuggling when no hard evidence has been produced

posted by oscar

My brother travels to Thailand regually and has his own little ritual for checking his luggage before and after boarding. If she was as smart as her relatives say, she must have been smart enough to know if she was being duped. Getting duped at airports especially to the East is something that is heavilly advertised and we even had a tv campaign some years back. The truth is that i doubt we will ever know the truth.

So if some corrupt policemen decides to plant something on your brother just because he doesn't like the look of him (maybe he looks like a drug smuggler) and it is his word against the policeman's your attitude will clearly be tough **** brother you are clearly guilty

i doubt that she would have been arrested and held for absolutely nothing.

But then of course you know from your own experience that policemen never tell lies to get a conviction. You were clearly guilty so why did you appeal in your own particular case and don't you think it terrible you got away with it?

posted by peter lake

She should have British legal representation and a fair trial. If after a fair trial it should show there is unquestionable proof that she deliberately smuggled the drugs in, the she must face the law of that country. If there is the slightest doubt, she should be brought home.

I'd agree with you there but clearly oscar and panto andy do not.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 05, 2009 4:20 am

gmc;1183809 wrote: posted by panto andy

Just because someone is arrested does not make them guilty. Ask Oscar to explain it to you, she might just possibly be able to grasp the concept of innocent till proven guilty and the need for a fair trial and the right to appeal a judgement. She might even have the glimmering of an understanding that human rights and little things like the right tio a fairv trial is not do gooders getting in the way of fine upstanding police forces around the world clearing the street of the riff raff.

To suggest that someone on prison on trial for their life would get pregnant just to get out of it is a leap of demented logic straight out of the right wing nutters guide to stupidity that beggar belief.

Posted by oscar

While gmc is quick to assume that she was raped in prison, he condemns anyone for assuming she was trying to smuggle heroin. When the details are so sketchy, it is hypocritical to object to Andy and my post assuming her guilt when he has no hard evidence that she was raped in prison. Pot, kettle and black spring to mind. It says in your article Rapunzel that there is no evidence as yet that she was raped so at the moment, we are all in the dark.

On balance i would put it to you that she was more likely raped than she felt the need for a bit if rumpy pumpy to help pass the time and was silly enough to forget she might get pregnant.

You are quite ready to assume her guilt in drug smuggling when no hard evidence has been produced

posted by oscar

So if some corrupt policemen decides to plant something on your brother just because he doesn't like the look of him (maybe he looks like a drug smuggler) and it is his word against the policeman's your attitude will clearly be tough **** brother you are clearly guilty

But then of course you know from your own experience that policemen never tell lies to get a conviction. You were clearly guilty so why did you appeal in your own particular case and don't you think it terrible you got away with it?

posted by peter lake

I'd agree with you there but clearly oscar and panto andy do not. The latest.

'Drug-smuggling' Briton will NOT face firing squad in Laos 'because she is pregnant,' says government | Mail Online

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 5:35 am

pantoandy;1183530 wrote: personally my sympathy for this drug smuggler is zero.

If she's found guilty, then bang! If not, she should be released. That's all there is to it, isn't it?

As to all this "can't trust foreign law" - piffle. You go abroad, & are subject to "whoever's" law, not "ours".

Post by **pantoandy** » Tue May 05, 2009 6:37 am

Bill Sikes;1183836 wrote: If she's found guilty, then bang! If not, she should be released. That's all there is to it, isn't it?

As to all this "can't trust foreign law" - piffle. You go abroad, & are subject to "whoever's" law, not "ours".

just my point sikesy lets wait and see if she is found guilty

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 6:56 am

pantoandy;1183862 wrote: just my point sikesy

They call me *Mister* Sikes.

Post by **pantoandy** » Tue May 05, 2009 7:29 am

Bill Sikes;1183885 wrote: They call me *Mister* Sikes.

MY APOLOGIES MISTER SIKES

************************ the grumps :yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Tue May 05, 2009 8:24 am

Thank you, pantoandy.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 05, 2009 8:36 am

pantoandy;1183896 wrote: MY APOLOGIES MISTER SIKES

************************ the grumps :yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl And it's MRS Oscar :sneaky:

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue May 05, 2009 10:49 am

pantoandy;1183862 wrote: just my point sikesy lets wait and see if she is found guilty

Falls off chair in amazement. You've changed your tune a bit haven't you? Or perhaps you dom't read your own posts.

posted by panto andy

hopefully justice will take its course although postponed untill after the baby is born and orobator faces the firing squad.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Tue May 05, 2009 12:00 pm

gmc;1184012 wrote: Falls off chair in amazement. You've changed your tune a bit haven't you? Or perhaps you dom't read your own posts.

posted by panto andy That'll be due to the love in we had this morning :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

Post by **pantoandy** » Wed May 06, 2009 3:54 am

gmc;1184012 wrote: Falls off chair in amazement. You've changed your tune a bit haven't you? Or perhaps you dom't read your own posts.

posted by panto andy

not really look at the main points

she was caught with 1.5 lbs of heroin on her way back to the uk

she is 5 months pregnant yet she has been in custody for 9 months oh yes the sentence is death for that amount of heroin yet she will not be executed if pregnant

what would the street value of 1.5 lbs of heroin be ?

and whats to say she would have got through at heathrow or gatwick without being stopped.

come on take off the rose tinted glasses she,s about as innocent as Michael jackson in mothercare with his c**k out .

but i suppose the drug smuggling scumbag has to have a fair trial my sympathy is still zero there is no other drug apart from cocaine worse than heroin if guilty she deserves the full magnitude of the law .

i have no time for druggies let them take as much as they like give em a bad batch and watch the scumbags die like flies.

they dont work they steal to support their habit they contribute nothing to society yet decent working people like us have to pay for hospital treatment and prisons to keep them in out of our taxes while they just lay about and get drugged up to the eyeballs every day.

COME IN TO THE REAL WORLD GMC YOUR TIMES UP !!!!!!!!

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed May 06, 2009 8:26 am

pantoandy;1184321 wrote: not really look at the main points

she was caught with 1.5 lbs of heroin on her way back to the uk

she is 5 months pregnant yet she has been in custody for 9 months oh yes the sentence is death for that amount of heroin yet she will not be executed if pregnant

what would the street value of 1.5 lbs of heroin be ?

and whats to say she would have got through at heathrow or gatwick without being stopped.

come on take off the rose tinted glasses she,s about as innocent as Michael jackson in mothercare with his c**k out .

but i suppose the drug smuggling scumbag has to have a fair trial my sympathy is still zero there is no other drug apart from cocaine worse than heroin if guilty she deserves the full magnitude of the law .

i have no time for druggies let them take as much as they like give em a bad batch and watch the scumbags die like flies.

they dont work they steal to support their habit they contribute nothing to society yet decent working people like us have to pay for hospital treatment and prisons to keep them in out of our taxes while they just lay about and get drugged up to the eyeballs every day.

COME IN TO THE REAL WORLD GMC YOUR TIMES UP !!!!!!!!

I am in the real world but I'm not sure what planet you're on.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri May 22, 2009 3:48 pm

gmc;1184383 wrote: I am in the real world but I'm not sure what planet you're on. The latest revelations are bad news.

British 'drug-mule' girl may have artificially inseminated herself in Laos prison to escape death penalty | Mail Online

The article also states that she was caught with the heroin on her fair and square but there is a possibility she could have artificially inseminated herself to get pregnant after a syrynge was found amongst her possessions in the prison.