Peru drug smuggling case - READ OP BEFORE POSTING

greenflash

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Irish Daily Mirror ‏@IrishMirror 59s
Drugs mule Michaella McCollum Connolly is to return to Ireland after authorities in Peru accepted a prison transfer request - reports.

Will she end up an ROI or NI prison? Will she even serve her sentence?

pc7

greenflash wrote: »

Will she end up an ROI or NI prison? Will she even serve her sentence?

Will she still have her hair in a bun?

c_man

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Irish Daily Mirror ‏@IrishMirror 59s
Drugs mule Michaella McCollum Connolly is to return to Ireland after authorities in Peru accepted a prison transfer request - reports.

Coming back to Ireland? Hmm, seems like a good story setup for a sequel to Con-Air.

Timothy Bryce

c_man wrote: »

Coming back to Ireland? Hmm, seems like a good story setup for a sequel to Con-Air.

You can bet one of the red-tops will use that headline in the coming days/weeks

jester77

Who would pay for her flight?

Peist2007

Great result for her if true. Lucky

Paddy Cow

Does the Scottish one get to go back to the UK?

ArmaniJeanss

jester77 wrote: »

Who would pay for her flight?

Prisoners being repatriated to the UK will pay for their own flight, either in advance or if they don't have the money to hand they can pay in instalments when they get back.
I'd expect Ireland to be the same.

****
To those wondering whether she would do jail time in UK/Ireland at all, as far as I know she would remain a Peruvian prisoner so under the agreements between the countries would only be released when the Peru prison service decides.

donegal__road

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Does the Scottish one get to go back to the UK?

yes, that was agreed on a few months ago afaik

Leslie91

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Prisoners being repatriated to the UK will pay for their own flight, either in advance or if they don't have the money to hand they can pay in instalments when they get back.
I'd expect Ireland to be the same.

****
To those wondering whether she would do jail time in UK/Ireland at all, as far as I know she would remain a Peruvian prisoner so under the agreements between the countries would only be released when the Peru prison service decides.

I hope that is the case but wouldn't bet on it.

ted1

once in prison, can you bring a case against the Northern Ireland government for illegal detention.

After all she has not being found guilty of any crime in the jurisdication?

ArmaniJeanss

ted1 wrote: »

once in prison, can you bring a case against the Northern Ireland government for illegal detention.

After all she has not being found guilty of any crime in the jurisdication?

Nope, she will still technically be a Peruvian prisoner and would have to make any such appeal via their system first.
These agreements have been in place for decades and are watertight for such loopholes.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ted1

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Nope, she will still technically be a Peruvian prisoner and would have to make any such appeal via their system first.
These agreements have been in place for decades and are watertight for such loopholes.

so does that mean that we could outsource our Prison service to other countries?

I'm sure we could save a packet if we did.

Turtyturd

Wonder how long before she gets TR to show up on the Late Late Show and give her sob story.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

_Kaiser_

So there ya go...

This stupid brazen entitled young one is to get her wish and be transferred home after all. A book deal and spot on some reality TV trash will no doubt follow.

That's the power of social media for ya. Where any criminal can be reborn as long as you have a good sob story. Guess Melissa's family aren't as up on the oul FB/Twitter!

LuckyLloyd

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So there ya go...

This stupid brazen entitled young one is to get her wish and be transferred home after all. A book deal and spot on some reality TV trash will no doubt follow.

That's the power of social media for ya. Where any criminal can be reborn as long as you have a good sob story. Guess Melissa's family aren't as up on the oul FB/Twitter!

She's still going to be in prison to be fair. While I'm not one of those who feel she was harshly treated or unfortunate, etc - I do think that once she serves her period of incarceration like anyone else that allied to her criminal record is punishment enough. If the Peruvian authorities are satisfied with the deal then I don't see how it can be questioned.

_Kaiser_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

She's still going to be in prison to be fair. While I'm not one of those who feel she was harshly treated or unfortunate, etc - I do think that once she serves her period of incarceration like anyone else that allied to her criminal record is punishment enough. If the Peruvian authorities are satisfied with the deal then I don't see how it can be questioned.

It's still special treatment though, otherwise why isn't her partner in crime (and in fact every other non-national in prison there) repatriated?

She's getting home because her family and the media whipped up such a frenzy about it and the locals have decided it's not worth the aggravation to keep her there presumably.

Low-life common criminal with a FB account > justice system of the country in question.. that's a good moral to this story alright!

LuckyLloyd

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's still special treatment though, otherwise why isn't her partner in crime (and in fact every other non-national in prison there) repatriated?

She's getting home because her family and the media whipped up such a frenzy about it and the locals have decided it's not worth the aggravation to keep her there presumably.

Low-life common criminal with a FB account > justice system of the country in question.. that's a good moral to this story alright!

Her partner in crime is being repatriated.

The media furore around this has died down. This decision is being made long after the screaming and shouting. There are no high profile media cheerleaders for this girl left that I am aware of.

It seems like the justice system of the country in question is comfortable with the decision. No sentence is being overridden here. No official pressure is being brought to bear. A mature and compassionate decision is being made that is mutually agreeable to all parties. Prisoners should have the right to be visited and be in contact with their loved ones. She will still serve her sentence.

_Kaiser_

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Her partner in crime is being repatriated.

Is she? Any stories I've seen so far only talk about Michaela

It seems like the justice system of the country in question is comfortable with the decision. No sentence is being overridden here. No official pressure is being brought to bear. A mature and compassionate decision is being made that is mutually agreeable to all parties. Prisoners should have the right to be visited and be in contact with their loved ones. She will still serve her sentence.

Guess that's where we disagree. Criminals/Prisoners (not just this one) should have absolute minimal "rights", but then in our modern enlightened society they're often afforded more consideration than their victims.

If she was so concerned about having access to her family then maybe she shouldn't have tried to smuggle a load of drugs out of a foreign country - but I guess that's a moot point now.

dundalkfc10

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Is she? Any stories I've seen so far only talk about Michaela



Guess that's where we disagree. Criminals/Prisoners (not just this one) should have absolute minimal "rights", but then in our modern enlightened society they're often afforded more consideration than their victims.

If she was so concerned about having access to her family then maybe she shouldn't have tried to smuggle a load of drugs out of a foreign country - but I guess that's a moot point now.

She was granted it a few months back, dont think she is back yet though

Turtyturd

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The media furore around this has died down. This decision is being made long after the screaming and shouting. There are no high profile media cheerleaders for this girl left that I am aware of.

Did RTE have a piece of propaganda on the family a few weeks back?

Calhoun

Turtyturd wrote: »

Did RTE have a piece of propaganda on the family a few weeks back?

I thought rte did a really good job presenting a unbiased fact based view, I thought it was going be a propaganda piece but it wasn't.

Edit: no idea how I put a smiley In the title.

Kidchameleon

Im happpy for them. Ive as yet to see any solid evidence that they are lying.

Peist2007

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Im happpy for them. Ive as yet to see any solid evidence that they are lying.

By that rationale anyone accused of anything could claim aliens from outer space did it and then sit back and say "prove i'm lying"

:rolleyes:

Grandpa Hassan

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Im happpy for them. Ive as yet to see any solid evidence that they are lying.

You mean except for the bit where they admitted they were lying!?

LuckyLloyd

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Im happpy for them. Ive as yet to see any solid evidence that they are lying.

Ah here

upforit101

Excellent article by a former Drug smuggler on the realities of the trade - He reckons the pair would have made $20,000-40,000 each and had a 90% chance of succeeding.

"So what happened was probably one of three things:

1.Most likely, the cops who were paid off at the Lima airport simply ****ed up.

2.The cops deliberately ****ed over the guy who paid them off.

3.My favorite reason – the guy who was supposed to pay the cops just pocketed the money and ****ed off. Peruvians will do that kind of ****.

Now, if they were going back to Blighty, prices there are highly variable. Let’s call it anywhere between $40,000 to $80,000 per kilo wholesale.

They had 11 kilos, so there was probably 15-20 and the cops took some off the top for themselves to sell (standard operating procedure).

Let’s say there were 16 and the guy spent about $20,000 to buy it, and maybe another $10,000 in packaging, airfare, and incidentals. My approximate guess is that someone laid out $30,000 for a 90% chance of making $800,000. Them’s pretty good ****in’ odds.

A standard reasonable rate to pay the girls would be $5,000 per kilo. I’d guess they were offered less than that, but who knows.

If they had a 90% chance of making $20,000-40,000 each just for getting on and off an airplane, that’s not bad.

Most people work really hard for a whole year to make that much money, and these girls make it in a day for nothing more than having guts".

http://www.expat-chronicles.com/2014/07/peru-two-smuggler/

Micky Dolenz

It is highly unlikely that they were to make that much cash, they probably had no idea of the specific weight they were carrying.

After a lot of research (watching banged up aboard ) the common figure is 10k a trip, which isn't too bad.

Lapin

pc7 wrote: »

Will she still have her hair in a bun?

Of course.






Thats where she hides the drugs.

Dravokivich

upforit101 wrote: »

If they had a 90% chance of making $20,000-40,000 each just for getting on and off an airplane, that’s not bad.

Most people work really hard for a whole year to make that much money, and these girls make it in a day for nothing more than having guts".

Weren't they scared shítless?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

upforit101 wrote: »

Excellent article by a former Drug smuggler on the realities of the trade - He reckons the pair would have made $20,000-40,000 each and had a 90% chance of succeeding.

"So what happened was probably one of three things:

1.Most likely, the cops who were paid off at the Lima airport simply ****ed up.

2.The cops deliberately ****ed over the guy who paid them off.

3.My favorite reason – the guy who was supposed to pay the cops just pocketed the money and ****ed off. Peruvians will do that kind of ****.

Now, if they were going back to Blighty, prices there are highly variable. Let’s call it anywhere between $40,000 to $80,000 per kilo wholesale.

They had 11 kilos, so there was probably 15-20 and the cops took some off the top for themselves to sell (standard operating procedure).

Let’s say there were 16 and the guy spent about $20,000 to buy it, and maybe another $10,000 in packaging, airfare, and incidentals. My approximate guess is that someone laid out $30,000 for a 90% chance of making $800,000. Them’s pretty good ****in’ odds.

A standard reasonable rate to pay the girls would be $5,000 per kilo. I’d guess they were offered less than that, but who knows.

If they had a 90% chance of making $20,000-40,000 each just for getting on and off an airplane, that’s not bad.

Most people work really hard for a whole year to make that much money, and these girls make it in a day for nothing more than having guts".

http://www.expat-chronicles.com/2014/07/peru-two-smuggler/

Six years in jail is not worht the risk, espeically when it could be Peruvian. I'd also be curious what would happen if I made it through and they refused to pay me. Hardly going to do to an employment tribunal.

Penny Dreadful

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Im happpy for them. Ive as yet to see any solid evidence that they are lying.

They admitted that they carried out the crime

end of the road

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Criminals/Prisoners (not just this one) should have absolute minimal "rights"

they have minimal rights, the days of prisoners having no rights are gone get over it, giving them no rights never worked in its aims, at least this way treating them like humans has the opportunity to work on someone at least.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

in our modern enlightened society they're often afforded more consideration than their victims.

not true, just rabel rabel bull****

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

If she was so concerned about having access to her family then maybe she shouldn't have tried to smuggle a load of drugs out of a foreign country - but I guess that's a moot point now.

yes it definitely is, if your so outraged about her smuggling drugs i take it you don't take any drug including alcohol? or are you an alacart anti-drugs type?

Lapin

end of the road wrote: »

yes it definitely is, if your so outraged about her smuggling drugs i take it you don't take any drug including alcohol? or are you an alacart anti-drugs type?

Alcohol is perfectly legal. These convicted criminal women were smuggling cocaine.

You're not comparing like with like.

As for Kaiser's other point about the criminals often being afforded more consideration than their victims. He's dead right.

Its not 'rabel rabel bull****' at all.

Ask the victims of crime.

_Kaiser_

end of the road wrote: »

they have minimal rights, the days of prisoners having no rights are gone get over it, giving them no rights never worked in its aims, at least this way treating them like humans has the opportunity to work on someone at least.

What exactly has it achieved? Seems to me she's getting off very lightly. She'll probably get out early too.

not true, just rabel rabel bull****

Really? Go sit in court some day and watch how "justice" works in this country, or go speak to some of the real victims of crimes as to how reassured they feel. The lack of real, effective punishment is WHY we have such a high level of re-offending.

yes it definitely is, if your so outraged about her smuggling drugs i take it you don't take any drug including alcohol? or are you an alacart anti-drugs type?

*sigh* Class-A illegal drugs are significantly different to the occasional pint, but I see this argument trotted out regularly in an attempt to legalise the "harmless" stuff or justify behaviour like this.

For the record though, I might have 1/2 pints every few months (no real interest and don't "need" them to have a decent night), don't smoke, and have never tried any of the other stuff - the idea of filling my body with the chemical byproduct of some lab experiment just never appealed to me I guess.

end of the road

Lapin wrote: »

Alcohol is perfectly legal. These convicted criminal women were smuggling cocaine.
You're not comparing like with like.

doesn't matter, drugs are drugs, i've no right to get outraged over someone taking or smuggling cocaine as i drink alcohol, i believe that to be the case for all.

Lapin wrote: »

As for Kaiser's other point about the criminals often being afforded more consideration than their victims. He's dead right.

no he's not

Lapin wrote: »

Its not 'rabel rabel bull****' at all.

yes it is

Lapin wrote: »

Ask the victims of crime.

some will always say otherwise, they are in a vunerable position and have been through something bad.

end of the road

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Seems to me she's getting off very lightly. She'll probably get out early too.

so be it

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

The lack of real, effective punishment is WHY we have such a high level of re-offending.

no its not, sometimes for certain crimes punishments will never work, such as the drugs trade.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

*sigh* Class-A illegal drugs are significantly different to the occasional pint, but I see this argument trotted out regularly in an attempt to legalise the "harmless" stuff or justify behaviour like this.

drugs are drugs. end of fcuking story, criminalizing people for taking drugs has failed. why continue with it, education would be much better.

Cantremember

end of the road wrote: »

so be it



no its not, sometimes for certain crimes punishments will never work, such as the drugs trade.



drugs are drugs. end of fcuking story, criminalizing people for taking drugs has failed. why continue with it, education would be much better.

Punishments themselves are part of the process in dealing with crime. Revenge has to be managed. There is a point to be made that the drugs war is lost because people actually want them regardless of the misery they cause. There may well be a case to be made that management of the thing could be done more effectively eg make it a legitimate industry and tax the **** out of it to pay for the costs to society of hospitalisation etc etc. your faith in the power of education is charming. In the case in question here it's a pity the cost of keeping these people in jail is being transferred to the tax payer of the country concerned rather than keeping them abroad. It's scandalous that government resources at diplomatic level are used to achieve that. Rights are not the last word: they are a human invention for a human end and need reassessment. Civil rights may well be changed limited or circumscribed as civil society sees fit. And that also applies to human rights.

Idbatterim

If they had a 90% chance of making $20,000-40,000 each just for getting on and off an airplane, that’s not bad.

Most people work really hard for a whole year to make that much money, and these girls make it in a day for nothing more than having guts".

yeah and for the 10% of the time you get caught, over two thirds of probably the best decade of your life is gone, rotting inside what appears to be a hell hole of a Peruvian prison, where an hour to them probably seems like a day to us here. If / when she gets sent back to Northern Ireland, will she have to serve the full sentence as handed down by the Peruvians or is there a possibility of early release?

Shakakan

I hope Michaella gets out early and ends up on Geordie Shore and makes a tonne of money..

Just to see the look on the faces of some people here

Totes hillare-balls

I am pie

Legalisation might work in a western context in affluent countries but it won't do anything for people who smoke paco and heroin to escape the torturous reality of the their daily lives in Asia and South America.

Even to a certain context in Ireland I believe that the legalise everything argument allows us to abdicate from our responsibility to fight the social causes of substance abuse. I don't believe many people thing "ooh, smack, that'd be nice, I might get into that!" , more likely trauma or tragedy has them looking for an escape. Legalisation is a libertarian favourite as it allows corporations to license and sell these "products" and promote their use. Let's not imagine for a second that if we legalised heroin it would only be presribed via pharmacies...it would be promoted and sold. Addicts would be created. As with all libertarian ideas the loser is generally society and big business is the winner.

We should be prescribing & managing these drugs to existing addicts via a public sector organisation. We should be fighting the causes of addiction.

Footnote, I would only apply this to strongly addictive substances, I would regulate weed much like alcohol.

Cantremember

Shakakan wrote: »

I hope Michaella gets out early and ends up on Geordie Shore and makes a tonne of money..

Just to see the look on the faces of some people here

Totes hillare-balls

Have u totes hacked my webcam and lifted my spliff?

Standman

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Is she? Any stories I've seen so far only talk about Michaela



Guess that's where we disagree. Criminals/Prisoners (not just this one) should have absolute minimal "rights", but then in our modern enlightened society they're often afforded more consideration than their victims.

If she was so concerned about having access to her family then maybe she shouldn't have tried to smuggle a load of drugs out of a foreign country - but I guess that's a moot point now.

What would be an adequate punishment for her then in your opinion?

I really think that many people with this kind of attitude like the idea of punishment more than than actually tackling any underlying issues.

Approaching the treatment of criminals in a level headed way doesn't give you the same satisfyingly fuzzy feeling of righteous indignation I suppose.

end of the road

Cantremember wrote: »

it's a pity the cost of keeping these people in jail is being transferred to the tax payer of the country concerned rather than keeping them abroad.

get over it

Cantremember wrote: »

It's scandalous that government resources at diplomatic level are used to achieve that.

its not, thats their job

Cantremember wrote: »

Rights are not the last word

yes they are.

Cantremember wrote: »

they are a human invention for a human end and need reassessment.

they don't unless its extra rights.

Cantremember wrote: »

Civil rights may well be changed limited or circumscribed as civil society sees fit.

yes, to add extra rights.

Cantremember wrote: »

that also applies to human rights.

no it doesn't, human rights are non-negotiable

Lapin

@ end of the road.

You are either -

1, A very poor troll.
2, Completely deluded.
3, Michaella McCallum's sister.

Try backing up some of your posts with some facts from reliable sources.

People might take you more seriously then.

Coming out with opinionated statements like 'no he isn't', 'yes it is' or 'so be it' isn't worth a pinch of salt.

Pumpkinseeds

They should have left her where she was. I doubt she'll stay in prison once she's back in Northern Ireland. They'll probably let her out on licence or something stupid.

Paddy Cow

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Her partner in crime is being repatriated.

The media furore around this has died down. This decision is being made long after the screaming and shouting. There are no high profile media cheerleaders for this girl left that I am aware of.

It seems like the justice system of the country in question is comfortable with the decision. No sentence is being overridden here. No official pressure is being brought to bear. A mature and compassionate decision is being made that is mutually agreeable to all parties. Prisoners should have the right to be visited and be in contact with their loved ones. She will still serve her sentence.

Not good enough. She should be flayed alive and rolled in popping candy

I am pie

In fairness they probably won't do it again and Peru will have two less morons to keep when they are sent back.

Hopefully enough publicity has been generated to stop any other young women (i.e. believe that's the MO of the gang)from being so stupid & greedy.