Samantha Orobator facing the death penalty

[Halibut]

u do the crime u do ur time she shouldnt av smugged drugs shud she you never no the drugs she was bringing the smack head who wantd them cud av robbed ur house to pay for them so u no what she shud av thought i am 20 yr old i cud die for doing this but she took the choice and did it didnt she

 

Do you think her (innocent) unborn baby should die as well?

[Ghostrider]

Arriving in our hotel in Amsterdam a few years ago, we were amazed to discover - whilst putting our passports in our room safe - that it contained some complimentary spliffs for the guests!

Well it beats the complimentary packs of tea bags etc...

[jeremyjh1]

That's what everyone forgets.

She's a killer.

Not in so much as she holds the gun but her crap kills people and that's before you consider the rest of the murders in the drugs trade.

 

She makes cash and people die.

 

Get involved in that and it's hard luck whatever happens to you.

 

OK, let's draw your views out shall we?

 

'It's not so much as she holds the gun... her crap kills people'

 

Are you saying that the messenger is as culpable as the manufacturer (the maker of the gun) because the vehicle, i.e. the drug, kills people?

 

What about the manufacturers of cars - they kill people?

 

And those who make and sell knifes - they have been known to kill people?

 

It is not definite that someone taking drugs will end up dying from it. I don't know the figures (I doubt anyone would or coudl really know), but I would guess that the percentage of people who die from drug taking is less than say the percentage of people who die from smoking or drinking alcohol.

 

Do you advocate the death penalty for the brewers and distillers, publicans and the owners/managers of off-licences, newsagents and supermarkets? After all, they supply something that kills people?

 

It is very easy to have an unyeilding, narrow-mind when it's simply a question of legality. If alcohol and tobacco were made illegal tomorrow, would you have the same view towards those who 'push' the kill substance as you do those who 'push' drugs now?

[babi rach]

do you think her (innocent) unborn baby should die as well?

 

no i dont but the question differs what kind of prison would let its guards get intamate wiv the prisoners so its dwn to the law

[callippo]

it might be an idea to get some facts in order about the case in hand rather than waffle on about the desirability of the legislation of drugs from a UK perspective - which is a total non-starter in the South east Asian region in any case as illicit drug use is even more unpopular among ordinary people there than it is here.

 

1) The Lao have not executed anybody, even Lao citizens or drugs smugglers from countries with less diplomatic clout than the United Kingdom has got, like Bangladesh or East Timor, for over 20 years. So all this stuff on this forum and in the newspapers, whose correspondents haven't got the first clue about the Lao criminal justice system, about the woman getting executed is about a million miles wide of the mark. Other countries nearby, Thailand, Malaysia and Cambodia, have also called moratoriums on the death penalty and haven't executed anybody for some years now.

 

2) The Lao (not Laotian, which is a word that westerners use, not Lao people) have already said that they're not going to pass a death sentence on a pregnant woman anyway. She's been in jail for at least six months, and has gotten pregnant twice - possibly because of this very reason, we don't know, details are very sketchy as the girl has no legal representation and no form of communication with the outside world until the British Embassy visited her in jail last week.

 

3) The chances are that she will, as a pregnant woman, get sentenced to a very long tariff, and then following diplomatic representations from the UK foreign office, get repatriated back to the UK, where she will in all likelihood serve the kind of sentence most drugs mules get here - about seven or eight years.

 

4) meanwhile, there are several older male prisoners of British nationality languishing in prison in Laos serving long sentences for similar offences, who have next to no chance of getting repatriated by comparison.

 

to sum up, if you're going to do a very serious crime in a part of the world where it is punishable by the death penalty, and if you are caught and sentenced to a long term of imprisonment in prison conditions that are so bad that many people would probably prefer to be executed rather than having to serve their sentence in full, then it's definitely better to be young, female, attractive, and pregnant, rather than middle-aged, male, and looking like the back end of a Bangkok bus.

[sccsux]

One is legal, the other isn't.

 

See where your argument falls down yet?

[happyhippy]

Mod note

 

Please keep this on topic, and may I remind people that 'txtspk' isn't allowed on the Forum, and persistent use could lead to holidays.

 

Thanks everybody.

[Magilla]

That's what everyone forgets.

She's a killer.

Not in so much as she holds the gun but her crap kills people and that's before you consider the rest of the murders in the drugs trade.

 

She makes cash and people die.

 

So do pub landlords and newsagents who sell cigarettes? Not to mention the manufacturers of said products.

 

Get involved in that and it's hard luck whatever happens to you.

 

I see, so by your own logic, if the corner shop gets robbed it's their own fault for selling cigs?

[Magilla]

See where your argument falls down yet?

 

It doesn't. Their effects in terms of personal harm and harm to society *are* comparable despite each drug having a different legal classification.

 

My point of view is consistant, if you really think that all drugs are so terribly bad, why aren't you campaigning for the proscription of alcohol and cigs?

Edited May 12, 2009 by Magilla

[depoix]

OK, let's draw your views out shall we?

 

'It's not so much as she holds the gun... her crap kills people'

 

Are you saying that the messenger is as culpable as the manufacturer (the maker of the gun) because the vehicle, i.e. the drug, kills people?

 

What about the manufacturers of cars - they kill people?

 

And those who make and sell knifes - they have been known to kill people?

 

It is not definite that someone taking drugs will end up dying from it. I don't know the figures (I doubt anyone would or coudl really know), but I would guess that the percentage of people who die from drug taking is less than say the percentage of people who die from smoking or drinking alcohol.

 

Do you advocate the death penalty for the brewers and distillers, publicans and the owners/managers of off-licences, newsagents and supermarkets? After all, they supply something that kills people?

 

It is very easy to have an unyeilding, narrow-mind when it's simply a question of legality. If alcohol and tobacco were made illegal tomorrow, would you have the same view towards those who 'push' the kill substance as you do those who 'push' drugs now?

it doies not matter how you bend or twist the truth about drug mules,they carry drugs knowing the misery and death they cause and deserve very harsh prison terms