s corby, page-20

miles, it wouldn't have gone to court in the first place!
She wouldn't have to prove that the stuff wasn't hers. The prosecution would have to prove that it was; and the prosecution has only one fact before it: The stuff was in her bag.

They have no idea who's it is.
They have no idea how it got there.
They have evidence of a shoddy customs and bag handling section(s) at the airport. (lots of evidence for that)
They have a defendant who has never had a conviction of ANY sort, let alone drugs.
They have a bag which was put together very shabilly, or was interfered with by someone. No matter how stupid you are, you could work out that trying to smuggle 4and a half kilos to a country which has the death penalty for a hell of a lot less, was a definite no-no.
Here they have a jury system which could weigh such facts. There they have three ex-cops who proudly proclaim they've never lost a case. What does that say to me? It says that they are a known quantity for fellow corrupt cops. Very reliable. They'll get everyone a life or a death sentence. Just make sure they get caught!
And there's lots more. Far too much.
Which would bring about the situation of NOT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.
CASE DISMISSED.