EVEN before his trial ended, the parents of the 14-year-old boy caught with drugs in Bali has sold his story for a huge six-figure sum to 60 Minutes.
The exclusive contract with the boy, who is facing a possible six-year jail term for possessing marijuana, is understood to be between $200,000 and $300,000

Nine Entertainment bought the family's story and will spread the cost between 60 Minutes, Nine News and ACP magazines, most probably Woman's Day.

Rival network Seven bid heavily via current affairs program, Sunday Night.

The deal was finalised on Thursday by Nine's managing director Jeffrey Browne and was signed off by CEO David Gyngell.

Celebrity agent Grant Vandenberg acted on behalf of the family.

The Morisset Park teen, a self-confessed drug user, pleaded guilty when he appeared in a Bali court on Friday. He will be sentenced later this week.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.


The boy has spent five weeks in jail after his family holiday turned into a living hell when he was busted by police with 3.6g of cannabis on October 4.

Sixty Minutes intends to "unmask" him as a wide-eyed, frightened schoolboy who made a terrible mistake -- and who would not have survived his ordeal without the support of his heartbroken parents.

It's believed a team will fly to Bali on Wednesday to "shoot some colour for the interview, which will happen Friday



I just knew this would happen.. I think its a disgrace.. even the Pm went into bat for this boy and his parents. and look at this outcome..

its like feeding the devil. well bye bye channel nine and 60 minutes from me..we are now scraping the bottom of the barrel for stories..

this may not be on the surface a political thing... but our govt did step in right from day one... the govt has done an awful lot to protect this boy and to get him what looks like special favours... and they do this...they should never in my opinion have been allowed to do this.. this will now put every other person in an even more precarious position if they are dumb enough to go down this  path..


I think its a horrible outcome.

This is what feeds the Australian 10% that politicians, of all colours, rely on to respond in a predictable way with regard to non-European foreign countries and how far the Australian MSM has degraded itself in aid of ratings.

TLAs are annoying.

freediver wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:03am:

TLAs are annoying.

Thanks for the input.

Anything to say regarding the OP?

It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:13am:

It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing.

Yes... I think it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the judges will take a dim view of the boy being rewarded with a six figure sum for breaking Indonesian law.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:44am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:13am: It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing. Yes... I think it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the judges will take a dim view of the boy being rewarded with a six figure sum for breaking Indonesian law.

If i was a judge, I certainly would....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:46am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:44am: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:13am: It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing. Yes... I think it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the judges will take a dim view of the boy being rewarded with a six figure sum for breaking Indonesian law. If i was a judge, I certainly would....

they lost me a while back... but what about anyother stupid kid in the future?... the Courts over there are going to say... bugger off, you turn them into celebrities...

lets call on everyne to boycott 60 minutes...or write to channel 9 and let them kn ow this isnt on.. its shamefull how damn greedy and irresponsible we are becoming.

Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.?

Hicks for example? :(

Swagman wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 11:57am:

Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :(

I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy.

They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:44am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:13am: It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing. Yes... I think it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the judges will take a dim view of the boy being rewarded with a six figure sum for breaking Indonesian law.

By the time the carrier pigeon gets there the sentencing will be done.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 12:37pm:

Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place.

Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime....

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 1:19pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime....

I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws.
His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face.
Hicks was tried under retrospective laws.
If they take his, I want this kids money too.
Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:44am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:13am: It is disgusting. I hope they haven't added to their kids sentence by doing the deal. Some idiots can't be helped. I hope they realise that the judges will take this into account when sentencing. Yes... I think it doesn't take much imagination to guess that the judges will take a dim view of the boy being rewarded with a six figure sum for breaking Indonesian law.

Take a step back peeps... the boy is a minor and so not legally able to sign such a contact as has been discussed here.

Sounds to me like the parents have signed a deal to blab about their wayward son.

They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 1:26pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same.

I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager.

All blame lays at the feet of the Australian public and the weak minded rubbish that they lap up. The public love this "days of our lives stuff" just look at the rubbish they swallow politically. This is pure entertainment and we should be embarrassed and disgusted at just how low our society has fallen.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 1:26pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same.

Precisely Smithy....
He was a 'dingbat'...Although that's NOT unusual for a 14 yr old....We've ALL been there, done that..

nairbe wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:01pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:26pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same. I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager. All blame lays at the feet of the Australian public and the weak minded rubbish that they lap up. The public love this "days of our lives stuff" just look at the rubbish they swallow politically. This is pure entertainment and we should be embarrassed and disgusted at just how low our society has fallen.

I agree totally with the last paragraph, the 1st not so sure, I don't believe the poor innocent tripe the are pushing.
If he did drugs because of peer pressure why did he buy them when no peer pressure was involved?
What sort of parents let a 14 year old "child" walk the streets of a forgien country alone?
A child apparently with a drug problem, in a country where drugs are offered on the street?

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 1:51pm:

They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently.

That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:15pm:

nairbe wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:01pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:26pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same. I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager. All blame lays at the feet of the Australian public and the weak minded rubbish that they lap up. The public love this "days of our lives stuff" just look at the rubbish they swallow politically. This is pure entertainment and we should be embarrassed and disgusted at just how low our society has fallen. I agree totally with the last paragraph, the 1st not so sure, I don't believe the poor innocent tripe the are pushing. If he did drugs because of peer pressure why did he buy them when no peer pressure was involved? What sort of parents let a 14 year old "child" walk the streets of a forgien country alone? A child apparently with a drug problem, in a country where drugs are offered on the street?

Well how sheltered were you when you were 14 Smithy? I know if my kids saw a movie of me at 14 they'd call me the biggest hypocrite that ever lived  ;D

Sappho wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:23pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:51pm: They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently. That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract.

So what we are saying is Terry Hicks should have signed the contracts for David and we'd all be fine with that?
Then again we seem happy enough for Chopper Reid to make a living braging about his thuggery at clubs every six months.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:15pm:

nairbe wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:01pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:26pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same. I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager. All blame lays at the feet of the Australian public and the weak minded rubbish that they lap up. The public love this "days of our lives stuff" just look at the rubbish they swallow politically. This is pure entertainment and we should be embarrassed and disgusted at just how low our society has fallen. I agree totally with the last paragraph, the 1st not so sure, I don't believe the poor innocent tripe the are pushing. If he did drugs because of peer pressure why did he buy them when no peer pressure was involved? What sort of parents let a 14 year old "child" walk the streets of a forgien country alone? A child apparently with a drug problem, in a country where drugs are offered on the street?

Don't get me wrong smithy, the boys an idiot and the parents i hope are doing some big soul searching, i just dont think they could let the chance go by when they have so many bills to pay. This whole event would probably go close to bankrupting them so when a cashed up tv station come a knocking, they cashed in.

Grey wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:26pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:15pm: nairbe wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:01pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:26pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:19pm: Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 12:37pm: Swagman wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 11:57am: Isn't there a law against benefitting financially from criminal activity.? Hicks for example? :( I think it works like this. If you break American law you are the bad guy, if you break Indonesian law you are the good guy. They might be doing it so they can get a better lawyer. The parents must be ultra naive to think this won't have a rotten outcome. Channel nine are criminal for putting the parents into this situation in the first place. Different countries have different rules about benefiting from crime.... I'm draughting a letter to the Attorney General asking that this payment be confiscated under the proceeds of crime laws. His guilty, he has never denied he bought drugs then was stupid enough to brag about it and rub it in the locals face. Hicks was tried under retrospective laws. If they take his, I want this kids money too. Bogans getting rich from stupidity just encourages more to do the same. I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager. All blame lays at the feet of the Australian public and the weak minded rubbish that they lap up. The public love this "days of our lives stuff" just look at the rubbish they swallow politically. This is pure entertainment and we should be embarrassed and disgusted at just how low our society has fallen. I agree totally with the last paragraph, the 1st not so sure, I don't believe the poor innocent tripe the are pushing. If he did drugs because of peer pressure why did he buy them when no peer pressure was involved? What sort of parents let a 14 year old "child" walk the streets of a forgien country alone? A child apparently with a drug problem, in a country where drugs are offered on the street? Well how sheltered were you when you were 14 Smithy? I know if my kids saw a movie of me at 14 they'd call me the biggest hypocrite that ever lived  ;D

Thats not the point Grey.
I didn't get busted, I certainly wouldn't have bought drugs from a stranger while overseas and I certainly wasn't allowed to walk the streets alone when I was even at 16.

nairbe wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:01pm:

I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager.

I COULDN'T agree MORE
"Mob mentality" is very quick to judge without knowing all the circumstances and facts
The family is obviosly not in the "rich" income bracket - holidaying in Kuta
They should put themselves in the family's shoes for a minute



I found it an INCREDIBLEY IRRESPONSIBLE ACT - by whoever was the media spokesperson who went public with the deal

The Seven Network, I expect, who lost the bidding war

Sappho wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:23pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:51pm: They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently. That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract.

I don't care who signed the contract. Little drug fiends shouldn't be able to profit from their stupidity.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

Sappho wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:23pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:51pm: They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently. That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract. I don't care who signed the contract. Little drug fiends shouldn't be able to profit from their stupidity.

No, but they should be allowed to go on Big Brother and give us a nice night's entertainment.

If the story you're selling relates to a crime that's happened overseas and the dramas you've gone through far exceed what would have happened to you had you been caught for that crime here then it's extremely unlikely that the govt will be seeking to invoke the proceeds of crime legislation against you (Hicks excluded - his no profits thing was part of his release conditions).

Considering what this kid has gone through, I'm pretty sure he'd rather it hadn't happened than receive a few hundred thou - a large chunk of which will probably go towards his mouthpieces.

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

nairbe wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:01pm: I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager.   I COULDN'T agree MORE "Mob mentality" is very quick to judge without knowing all the circumstances and facts The family is obviosly not in the "rich" income bracket - holidaying in Kuta They should put themselves in the family's shoes for a minute I found it an INCREDIBLEY IRRESPONSIBLE ACT - by whoever was the media spokesperson who went public with the deal The Seven Network, I expect, who lost the bidding war

So what if the families not rich.
I'm part of no mob, the kid broke the law, he should be tried and sentanced with no interference from the Australian government or public.
If it was in the USA/UK would we even hear of it, NO, it's because we think we are somehow superior to poorer nations that the media/politicians/general public thinks we can influence their justice system.
Well we cant and this druggie as he would be called here should take his medicine.
What would the comments be if he mugged an old lady here for drug money and then got off with conselling I wonder.

Karnal wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:41pm:

Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:33pm: Sappho wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:23pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:51pm: They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently. That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract. I don't care who signed the contract. Little drug fiends shouldn't be able to profit from their stupidity. No, but they should be allowed to go on Big Brother and give us a nice night's entertainment.

Now look what you did. I vaguely remembered something about Big Brother being cancelled because of a man shoving his penis in a woman's face. Is that right?

Anyway, so I did a quick google to find more info and it appears Big Brother will be back in 2012   :-/

So as a result, I've obviously changed my mind and think the kid should keep his ill-gotten gains.

Quote:

(Hicks excluded - his no profits thing was part of his release conditions).

Do you think that's right?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:27pm:

Sappho wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:23pm: Annie Anthrax wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 1:51pm: They're interviewing the kid where he is incarcerated this week, apparently. That doesn't mean that the kid signed the contract. My bet is that the parents signed the contract. So what we are saying is Terry Hicks should have signed the contracts for David and we'd all be fine with that? Then again we seem happy enough for Chopper Reid to make a living braging about his thuggery at clubs every six months.

It was because Chopper Reid was milking it for all it was worth that the law was created... to stop any other criminals making a legit profit from their crime.

That law does not stop their family from making a buck out of their wayward kid.

Anyways... what is wrong with making a legitimate profit from your past... criminal or otherwise?

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

nairbe wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 2:01pm: I find the scathing attach on this boy to be interesting. First i would have thought it was his family that did the deed not the boy in negotiating a contract, but beside the timing of the announcement and the effect this may have on his trial i have no problem with the boys family. This will be an incredibly expensive trial. They will have Australian legal advisers, indonesian council and who knows what other costs to contend with. There is travel, time lost at work and accommodation, then there will be the counselling the boy will need when he is finally released. The family have made about the only decision they could bar selling the house to cover the stupidity of a teenager.   I COULDN'T agree MORE "Mob mentality" is very quick to judge without knowing all the circumstances and facts The family is obviosly not in the "rich" income bracket - holidaying in Kuta They should put themselves in the family's shoes for a minute I found it an INCREDIBLEY IRRESPONSIBLE ACT - by whoever was the media spokesperson who went public with the deal The Seven Network, I expect, who lost the bidding war

Surely you are not suggesting they are earning under $150 000. Poor bastards they can get the private health rebate though health

Whatever the motive, these fools have almost certainly ensured their son will do time in Indonesia.

I agree totally with the last paragraph, the 1st not so sure, I don't believe the poor innocent tripe the are pushing.
If he did drugs because of peer pressure why did he buy them when no peer pressure was involved?
What sort of parents let a 14 year old "child" walk the streets of a forgien country alone?
A child apparently with a drug problem, in a country where drugs are offered on the street?

Back to top  



that is what I said straight away.... why was he walking these streets alone.. at 14... he also has admitted smoking pot for a long time..it wasnt new and I think he knew exactly what he was doing... just didnt expect to be caught like all crims..

I dont think he deserves Jail in Bali thats for sure.. but I dont think he should come home as some kind of celebrity either. can you imagine him going to school and what his mates will be lapping up??..

as far as i know and I can find out... any help ones gets from the Australian govt overseas.. is not charged for..it was the Foreign minister that insisted on the Ambassador going  to Bali personally and he looked less than pleased as well..

this whole thing has got most distastful...I doubt very much 60 minutes will be the only ones looking for interviews..remember the boy with the yellow sunglasses.. look at the way they built him up.. cant even remember his name but he trashed his parents home.. and he was a hero almost... getting paid just to stand there with a hoody.

Who would take their kid to Bali to get away from his addiction to gunja?
Its close to the dumbest lie Ive heard for a long time...all Aussies know the place is crawling with the stuff, espesially Kuta.
In the end this kid went to another country and broke the law so he only has himself to blame.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 8:06am:

freediver wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:03am: TLAs are annoying. Thanks for the input. Anything to say regarding the OP?

Well, I'm sure it's worthy of a thread!

But, given some of the other threads that have been moved on, I fail to see how this fits into the Politicians Suck criteria!

No offense, Cods!

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 4:53pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:06am: freediver wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:03am: TLAs are annoying. Thanks for the input. Anything to say regarding the OP? Well, I'm sure it's worthy of a thread! But, given some of the other threads that have been moved on, I fail to see how this fits into the Politicians Suck criteria! No offense, Cods!

Im also losing track of what mods consider politics or not, there is certainly no consistancy in whats moved and what isnt.

adelcrow wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 4:55pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 4:53pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:06am: freediver wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:03am: TLAs are annoying. Thanks for the input. Anything to say regarding the OP? Well, I'm sure it's worthy of a thread! But, given some of the other threads that have been moved on, I fail to see how this fits into the Politicians Suck criteria! No offense, Cods! Im also losing track of what mods consider politics or not, there is certainly no consistancy in whats moved and what isnt.

To be honest, as I have said previously, I really don't care where people put their threads & posts, within reason.

But, the issue recently, is simply one of consistency and it is consistent, just not what most people would expect. There is a consistent bias, from Longweakend & FD is simply preferring to look the other way!

The problem is, it is FD's site and he will be left to pick up the pieces, when there's not much left!  

The issue is one of time. Nobody has the time to go through every single thread on this board, and we all have lives. Anyway, the General Board is more appropriate for this one.

adelcrow wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 4:48pm:

Who would take their kid to Bali to get away from his addiction to gunja? Its close to the dumbest lie Ive heard for a long time...all Aussies know the place is crawling with the stuff, especially Kuta. In the end this kid went to another country and broke the law so he only has himself to blame.

I agree. However given his age (and everything else that's transpired since day 1 of this saga) .. one also wonders what type of parents he has too.

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 5:05pm:

adelcrow wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 4:55pm: perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 4:53pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:06am: freediver wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:03am: TLAs are annoying. Thanks for the input. Anything to say regarding the OP? Well, I'm sure it's worthy of a thread! But, given some of the other threads that have been moved on, I fail to see how this fits into the Politicians Suck criteria! No offense, Cods! Im also losing track of what mods consider politics or not, there is certainly no consistancy in whats moved and what isnt. To be honest, as I have said previously, I really don't care where people put their threads & posts, within reason. But, the issue recently, is simply one of consistency and it is consistent, just not what most people would expect. There is a consistent bias, from Longweakend & FD is simply preferring to look the other way! The problem is, it is FD's site and he will be left to pick up the pieces, when there's not much left!

you are a classic perceptions... your ID is the least accurate one on here as your 'perception' ability is non-existent. As you know, I think much of what you write is less worthy than what ends up on toilet paper. HOWEVER, if you take note I have not edited, deleted or moved your posts and threads nor banned you. Reason? you obey the rules. And because the rules dont require you to be clever, accurate or perceptive then you have no problem. If you use your so-called 'perception' you will 'percieve' that the people running into trouble here are the people who dont follow the rules. it is really that simple.

Take Skippy for instance. he cant follow the rules but at the same time do you recall him making a post that added value to any debate? if you extract abuse from his words he would be contributing as much as some posters who left a year ago: nothing.

so in short, stop complaining and just keep posting and debating. the losers who wont play by the rules are the only ones with problems here.

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 5:27pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 5:05pm: adelcrow wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 4:55pm: perceptions_now wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 4:53pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:06am: freediver wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 8:03am: TLAs are annoying. Thanks for the input. Anything to say regarding the OP? Well, I'm sure it's worthy of a thread! But, given some of the other threads that have been moved on, I fail to see how this fits into the Politicians Suck criteria! No offense, Cods! Im also losing track of what mods consider politics or not, there is certainly no consistancy in whats moved and what isnt. To be honest, as I have said previously, I really don't care where people put their threads & posts, within reason. But, the issue recently, is simply one of consistency and it is consistent, just not what most people would expect. There is a consistent bias, from Longweakend & FD is simply preferring to look the other way! The problem is, it is FD's site and he will be left to pick up the pieces, when there's not much left!   you are a classic perceptions... your ID is the least accurate one on here as your 'perception' ability is non-existent. As you know, I think much of what you write is less worthy than what ends up on toilet paper. HOWEVER, if you take note I have not edited, deleted or moved your posts and threads nor banned you. Reason? you obey the rules. And because the rules dont require you to be clever, accurate or perceptive then you have no problem. If you use your so-called 'perception' you will 'percieve' that the people running into trouble here are the people who dont follow the rules. it is really that simple. Take Skippy for instance. he cant follow the rules but at the same time do you recall him making a post that added value to any debate? if you extract abuse from his words he would be contributing as much as some posters who left a year ago: nothing. so in short, stop complaining and just keep posting and debating. the losers who wont play by the rules are the only ones with problems here.

There you go sweetty, there are somethings, we can agree on!

But, most of it, we disagree!

As usual, you're entitled to your opinion, even when you are wrong, which you are on most issues, because you are stuck in the past and you don't understand what's happening, now!

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 5:27pm:

the losers  lefties who wont play by the my rules are the only ones with problems here.

cods wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 7:48am:

EVEN before his trial ended, the parents of the 14-year-old boy caught with drugs in Bali has sold his story for a huge six-figure sum to 60 Minutes. The exclusive contract with the boy, who is facing a possible six-year jail term for possessing marijuana, is understood to be between $200,000 and $300,000 Nine Entertainment bought the family's story and will spread the cost between 60 Minutes, Nine News and ACP magazines, most probably Woman's Day. Rival network Seven bid heavily via current affairs program, Sunday Night. The deal was finalised on Thursday by Nine's managing director Jeffrey Browne and was signed off by CEO David Gyngell. Celebrity agent Grant Vandenberg acted on behalf of the family. The Morisset Park teen, a self-confessed drug user, pleaded guilty when he appeared in a Bali court on Friday. He will be sentenced later this week. Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar. The boy has spent five weeks in jail after his family holiday turned into a living hell when he was busted by police with 3.6g of cannabis on October 4. Sixty Minutes intends to "unmask" him as a wide-eyed, frightened schoolboy who made a terrible mistake -- and who would not have survived his ordeal without the support of his heartbroken parents. It's believed a team will fly to Bali on Wednesday to "shoot some colour for the interview, which will happen Friday I just knew this would happen.. I think its a disgrace.. even the Pm went into bat for this boy and his parents. and look at this outcome.. its like feeding the devil. well bye bye channel nine and 60 minutes from me..we are now scraping the bottom of the barrel for stories.. this may not be on the surface a political thing... but our govt did step in right from day one... the govt has done an awful lot to protect this boy and to get him what looks like special favours... and they do this...they should never in my opinion have been allowed to do this.. this will now put every other person in an even more precarious position if they are dumb enough to go down this  path.. I think its a horrible outcome.

Cods,
I agree, this kid & the family, shouldn't be allowed to make money of this, but they probably will.

Quote:

Who would take their kid to Bali to get away from his addiction to gunja?

Who knows?
This kid's parents certainly didn't.

At a guess his first contact with pot was the day he got busted.

His parents were in Bali doing missionary work for the 7ups - not because their naive kid from Cooranbong has any prob with pot. They are just pushing that story in the hope that he doesn't get a custodial sentence.

How about the whole family finds it's own way back to Australia?

By boat?

Sheeit. I bet somebody's already planning a TV series about it...

buzzanddidj wrote on Nov 6^th, 2011 at 6:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Nov 6th, 2011 at 5:27pm: the losers  lefties who wont play by the my rules are the only ones with problems here.

you started your whining before I did anything. you are a victim of your own sour attitude. it must suck remembering you taunting about the Liberals being destroyed by labor and now to see your beleoved ALP on the ropes and wishing desperately to only be slaughtered rather than annihilated!

Suck it up, princess!

Using cannabis isn't a crime in my book.

But keeping it illegal, and imposing idiotic & draconian penalties for its use certainly IS a crime.

THE case of the Australian teenager arrested for drug possession in Bali could be severely damaged by claims he would receive up to $300,000 for telling his story on national television.
The Nine Network and 60 Minutes last night backed away from news it had done a deal with the 14-year-old's family, while Channel 7 denied it made an offer for an exclusive story.

The denials come after the prosecution in the case said any media deal could greatly damage the boy's chances for leniency in an Indonesian court this week, as financially benefiting from the case would be against Indonesian law.

"I am very shocked if that has happened," Chief Prosecutor I Gusti Gede Putu Atmaja said yesterday.

He said it was protocol that the judge presiding over the case be told if money has changed hands, or is likely to change hands, based on a criminal matter currently before the court.

"It is not a good thing to do, taking money for this if the family does that," Mr Atmaja said.

The boy's Australian agent Grant Vandenberg - who admitted speaking to both Nine and Seven on Saturday - last night said he had abandoned any deal after initially being asked to broker one. Vandenberg has been acting for the family and was reported to have brokered a deal with 60 Minutes worth between $200,000 and $300,000.

"There is no deal," he said last night.

It is understood the 14-year-old boy's father flew home to Australia last week, where he met with television executives and an agent about the deal.



Seven news and current affairs chief Peter Meakin denied Seven had ever been in the running.

"We didn't put a single bid in," he said last night.

"We are just not interested, and the big issue here is that it would just be the worst possible timing for the boy and his family to be dealing with the media."

A 60 Minutes team was at the court on Friday, filming background footage ahead of any planned interview with the teen and his family. A Nine spokesman said the network would "never say never" to interviewing the boy but decided to hold off.



it kind of makes you wonder just who can you believe any more...

I couldnt careless about this boy or his family anymore I am totally over them and I think the Australian govt has done plenty for them.

as for channel 9 shame on you... surely you are putting any ethics this country may have  had out there,  and destroying what little we have left after the Malaysian deal was cooked up.and thrown out by the HIGH COURT.

and as for selling a story to pay for your travel cost.. what a pity they didnt put that to their boy before they went on holiday..

Dunno what I find more disgusting: that the family would seek to profit from selling its extraordinary story - or that the media would report this in advance of the final hearing and verdict, knowing that the mere act of reporting could jeopardise a lenient outcome for the child in question!?

FFS, the kid was (seemingly) set up to get caught committing an act that should warrant a warning (at most) and the subsequent incarceration and legal process has been way over the top!

The fact is that some kids have smart parents like Michelle Leslie, they knew that they had to keep the media at bay, which they did pretty successfully. The minute you turn it into a media circus is the minute you turn the tide against yourself.

Equitist wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 8:31am:

Dunno what I find more disgusting: that the family would seek to profit from selling its extraordinary story - or that the media would report this in advance of the final hearing and verdict, knowing that the mere act of reporting could jeopardise a lenient outcome for the child in question!? FFS, the kid was (seemingly) set up to get caught committing an act that should warrant a warning (at most) and the subsequent incarceration and legal process has been way over the top!

I agree with your sentiments, however think about what it would be like if you were one of the parents.  This whole episode is likely to cost them a great deal financially, and even though it wasn't a very good idea to take him to Bali, you can't control everything they do at that age.

We don't know the details of this case. We don't know if they condone drug use in the home or if they are lax parents or over-strict parents (some benefit of the doubt is in order), but regardless of all that, they will be the ones to suffer financially and emotionally for this. At least the brat has been taught a lesson. Let's hope they are reasonably lenient on him for teh sake of the parents.

If I was in that situation, not knowing how I was going to pay for this mess and a major network offered a cheque, I'm not so self-righteous as to think I'd knock it back, especially if it gave one channel exclusive rights.  That in itself might help avoid a media circus.  

muso wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 8:50am:

Equitist wrote on Nov 7th, 2011 at 8:31am: Dunno what I find more disgusting: that the family would seek to profit from selling its extraordinary story - or that the media would report this in advance of the final hearing and verdict, knowing that the mere act of reporting could jeopardise a lenient outcome for the child in question!? FFS, the kid was (seemingly) set up to get caught committing an act that should warrant a warning (at most) and the subsequent incarceration and legal process has been way over the top! I agree with your sentiments, however think about what it would be like if you were one of the parents.  This whole episode is likely to cost them a great deal financially, and even though it wasn't a very good idea to take him to Bali, you can't control everything they do at that age. We don't know the details of this case. We don't know if they condone drug use in the home or if they are lax parents or over-strict parents, but regardless of all that, they will be the ones to suffer financially and emotionally for this. At least the brat has been taught a lesson. Let's hope they are reasonably lenient on him. If I was in that situation, not knowing how I was going to pay for this mess and a major network offered a cheque, I'm not so self-righteous as to think I'd knock it back.

True muso, I'm sure they'll have some hefty legal expenses. I just wish they had have put a privacy clause in place before they accepted, at least until they are all safely home.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 8:43am:

The fact is that some kids have smart parents like Michelle Leslie, they knew that they had to keep the media at bay, which they did pretty successfully. The minute you turn it into a media circus is the minute you turn the tide against yourself.

Valid point, Pansi - but I think it is difficult to judge how any family might react when directly confronted with such a difficult legal and stressful situation...

Given the minor nature of the offence, and the fact that the boy has been arrested in a foreign country with notoriously harsh legal and incarceration conditions, I reckon that many Aussie families would feel inclined to try to get media coverage to minimise the risk that their son will fall through the cracks...

Besides, the whole thing would be very traumatic - and it would be natural for the family to want to share their story out of both personal grief and concern to prevent other Australians from ending up in a similar situation...

As for the selling of the story, the family would be incurring considerable costs during this protracted legal process, on top of the day-to-day costs which would continue to tick over at home (house, utilities, car rego, insurances, etc.) - and probably loss of income too. That said, the smart thing would be for them to promise to donate any publicity fees to a charity!

As it happens, I also know someone who has been acquainted with the boy and his family for several years (through a sporting organisation) - and she reckons that he's a pretty good kid...

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 8:55am:

muso wrote on Nov 7th, 2011 at 8:50am: Equitist wrote on Nov 7th, 2011 at 8:31am: Dunno what I find more disgusting: that the family would seek to profit from selling its extraordinary story - or that the media would report this in advance of the final hearing and verdict, knowing that the mere act of reporting could jeopardise a lenient outcome for the child in question!? FFS, the kid was (seemingly) set up to get caught committing an act that should warrant a warning (at most) and the subsequent incarceration and legal process has been way over the top! I agree with your sentiments, however think about what it would be like if you were one of the parents.  This whole episode is likely to cost them a great deal financially, and even though it wasn't a very good idea to take him to Bali, you can't control everything they do at that age. We don't know the details of this case. We don't know if they condone drug use in the home or if they are lax parents or over-strict parents, but regardless of all that, they will be the ones to suffer financially and emotionally for this. At least the brat has been taught a lesson. Let's hope they are reasonably lenient on him. If I was in that situation, not knowing how I was going to pay for this mess and a major network offered a cheque, I'm not so self-righteous as to think I'd knock it back. True muso, I'm sure they'll have some hefty legal expenses. I just wish they had have put a privacy clause in place before they accepted, at least until they are all safely home.

Ditto, to both posts!

Quote:

Cods, I agree, this kid & the family, shouldn't be allowed to make money of this, but they probably will.

The law that stops people from making money by writing about their past criminal activities is wrong. It's not profitting from crime it's profitting from writing. People make money in all kinds of unsavoury ways. I don't see why ex crims going straight should be given extra hurdles to jump.

http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/03-350+Family+Court+lacks+jurisdiction+to+set+aside+Rich+financial+agreement?openDocument

If they use ghost writers (a lot of people do), they're not profiting from their writing.

And let's face it. None of these people are exactly candidates for a Pulitzer; in most cases they're barely up to scratch with trashy novels, but readers buy the book because of the infamy surrounding the crime.

Quote:

If they use ghost writers (a lot of people do), they're not profiting from their writing.

You sure about that?

Grey wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 5:33pm:

Quote: Cods, I agree, this kid & the family, shouldn't be allowed to make money of this, but they probably will. The law that stops people from making money by writing about their past criminal activities is wrong. It's not profitting from crime it's profitting from writing. People make money in all kinds of unsavoury ways. I don't see why ex crims going straight should be given extra hurdles to jump. http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/asic.nsf/byheadline/03-350+Family+Court+lacks+jurisdiction+to+set+aside+Rich+financial+agreement?openDocument

its sounds okay on the surface...

but how would you be if it was someone who had committed a crime against you or a family member.

then later made a fortune from books. films. interviews.. all at your expense??? I am not too sure you would have the same opinion to be honest... both Hicks and this boy have not committed a [so called] crime in this country..

but you cant say whats good for one, isnt good for another.. that wouldnt work at all.

Equitist wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 9:00am:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 7th, 2011 at 8:43am: The fact is that some kids have smart parents like Michelle Leslie, they knew that they had to keep the media at bay, which they did pretty successfully. The minute you turn it into a media circus is the minute you turn the tide against yourself. Valid point, Pansi - but I think it is difficult to judge how any family might react when directly confronted with such a difficult legal and stressful situation... Given the minor nature of the offence, and the fact that the boy has been arrested in a foreign country with notoriously harsh legal and incarceration conditions, I reckon that many Aussie families would feel inclined to try to get media coverage to minimise the risk that their son will fall through the cracks... Besides, the whole thing would be very traumatic - and it would be natural for the family to want to share their story out of both personal grief and concern to prevent other Australians from ending up in a similar situation... As for the selling of the story, the family would be incurring considerable costs during this protracted legal process, on top of the day-to-day costs which would continue to tick over at home (house, utilities, car rego, insurances, etc.) - and probably loss of income too. That said, the smart thing would be for them to promise to donate any publicity fees to a charity! As it happens, I also know someone who has been acquainted with the boy and his family for several years (through a sporting organisation) - and she reckons that he's a pretty good kid...

I couldnt agree less to be honest... this isnt a MINOR offence in BALI to start with... when in Rome do as the Romans do.. or pay the price.. this young boy is not that innocent and  his drug tests proved that.. I am sur ehe is a good kid... but he is not INNOCENT...

the facts are the Bali 9.s parents have also incurred huge expense... do you concider its okay for them to sell their stories as well???...I am sure they too have had the Consulate working overtime in Bali on their behalf.

why stop at druggies.. why not murderers and rapists... Ivan Milat could I a sure make a fortune I am thinking of the movie rights alone.. whew...

where do you think we should draw the line????? thats if you think one should be drawn?

you remind me of Mellie... making all those excuses for the girl in the AFL saga... and look how that turned out...lol..

get real.. you do realize they are setting a precedent.. and it isnt a nice one either..

they have a media manager?????????

I dont care how much it costs them.. let them run raffles like some have to do when they have a sick child that needs treatment outside of the box...

I know which one I support

freediver wrote on Nov 7^th, 2011 at 7:52pm:

Quote: If they use ghost writers (a lot of people do), they're not profiting from their writing. You sure about that?

Yes.

If a criminal uses a ghost writer to tell their story, it is not their own work that's making a profit, right? Someone else is doing the hard stuff, and the criminal is benefiting financially purely because they have committed a crime.

That's wrong.

It's a little bit more acceptable if the criminal actually does the work and is compensated financially for it (depending on the crime of course).

I think Chopper Read got away with keeping the profits from the sale of his books because he claims they were fiction.

If the ordinary Indonesian ever gets a chance to follow these frivolous stories that we tend to manufacture into something of importance, then I really wonder how they could have any respect at all for our ideals.

I initially thought that the kid deserved about two years for his parents to grow a brain, but now I'm more of the opinion that the Indonesians need to serve their people first and foremost and give him six.

Amadd wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 5:40am:

If the ordinary Indonesian ever gets a chance to follow these frivolous stories that we tend to manufacture into something of importance, then I really wonder how they could have any respect at all for our ideals. I initially thought that the kid deserved about two years for his parents to grow a brain, but now I'm more of the opinion that the Indonesians need to serve their people first and foremost and give him six.

Well now the family have denied any such deal and Ray Martin (though i don't particularly respect him) said last night that it was complete rubbish. Where does that leave us all. Yet again the media are spreading rubbish for a headline and now it is out there it cannot be retracted. The public are just suckers. Watch Alan Jones go on this on.

nairbe wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 5:44am:

Amadd wrote on Nov 8th, 2011 at 5:40am: If the ordinary Indonesian ever gets a chance to follow these frivolous stories that we tend to manufacture into something of importance, then I really wonder how they could have any respect at all for our ideals. I initially thought that the kid deserved about two years for his parents to grow a brain, but now I'm more of the opinion that the Indonesians need to serve their people first and foremost and give him six. Well now the family have denied any such deal and Ray Martin (though i don't particularly respect him) said last night that it was complete rubbish. Where does that leave us all. Yet again the media are spreading rubbish for a headline and now it is out there it cannot be retracted. The public are just suckers. Watch Alan Jones go on this on.

and where did Ray Martin get the news from?.... thats right channel 9. they are hardly going to admit doing something that has caused an outrage are they?....

funny how you only believe someone that agrees with your philosophy like this family deserves all the help it can get sort of philosophy... like they didnt really have anything to do with it it was all forced on them.....ok if you say so!