Appeal
They sought an appeal against the original sentence on the grounds that the original trial judge had drawn unwarranted inferences from circumstantial evidence and had erred on several points. Other arguments of the appeal revolved around the credibility of the arresting officer's testimony, and questions of whether Barlow and Chambers acted with a "common purpose" in trafficking in the drugs.
On 15 December 1985 they were transferred to Kuala Lumpur for their appeal to the Malaysian Supreme Court. There they were imprisoned in Pudu Prison. Barlow continued to profess his innocence. Pudu prison had been built in 1895 to hold about 700. By 1986 it held around 6,000 prisoners, almost 50 of whom were drug dealers sentenced to death.
The appeal started 16 December 1985. Chambers was represented at the appeal by Perth barrister Ron Cannon. Barlow's lawyer Karpal Singh was assisted by Melbourne barrister Frank Galbally at the appeal. On 16 December a row broke out between Singh and Galbally in the court room and was witnessed by press and court staff. The argument occurred after the judges had adjourned for the day and left the court, and lasted about five minutes. Galbally had urged Singh to file an additional ground for appeal for their client. Singh had said there was "little point" doing this, as no fresh evidence was involved. Galbally believed Barlow's shivering could be attributed to a spinal injury, however Singh reasoned that this was already adequately covered by medical evidence at the trial and in the existing appeal. At the appeal Singh had argued that Barlow's shivering could be attributed to his existing medical condition, or a foreigner's "unease" at being confronted by police. After the argument Singh finally left the room, warning Galbally over his shoulder not to criticise Malaysia's British-based legal system or suggest Australia's was superior. Singh attempted to have Galbally charged with contempt. The day after the row Galbally was asked for, and gave, an apology to the court for his words in court.
The appeal court on 18 December 1985 upheld the trial judge's decision to invoke the death penalty because the amount of the drug carried was in excess of the 15 gram cut-off point used to distinguish users from traffickers. On death row, Chambers had taken up biblical studies with a Western Catholic Missionary. He broke down and wept in her arms in the dock when three appeals judges upheld the conviction.
Galbally was not in court for the final decision of the appeal; Australian officials reported he had left Malaysia the night of 17 December after apologising to the Supreme Court over the row over contempt. After the result was publicised Galbally suggested that Barlow would have been found not guilty had the medical evidence he wanted introduced been admitted by the court. The evidence he wanted heard at the appeal was that Barlow had a nervous shake; the prosecution had used Barlow's shake at the time of his arrest as grounds for his guilt.
After the rejection of their appeal, Australia's Foreign Minister Bill Hayden contacted the Governor of Penang asking that the sentence be commuted to imprisonment on humanitarian grounds. Hayden stated that "I have always been and remain firmly opposed to capital punishment, and accordingly I will be pressing the presentation of this appeal for clemency with a great sense of urgency."
Through the ordeal of Barlow and Chambers, their mothers, Sue Chambers and Barbara Barlow, publicly supported the defence of innocence. However in a joint letter to the King of Malaysia Sultan Iskandar pleading for their lives, they acknowledged their sons' guilt, saying they "regretted their wrongdoing."
Read more about this topic: Barlow And Chambers Execution
Famous quotes containing the word appeal:
“The more dubious and uncertain an instrument violence has become in international relations, the more it has gained in reputation and appeal in domestic affairs, specifically in the matter of revolution.”
—Hannah Arendt (1906–1975)
“I appeal to you, my friends, as mothers: are you willing to enslave your children? You start back with horror and indignation at such a questions. But why, if slavery is not wrong to those upon whom it is imposed?”
—Angelina Grimké (1805–1879)
“The appeal of the New Right is simply that it seems to promise that nothing will change in the domestic realm. People are terrified of change there, because it’s the last humanizing force left in society, and they think, correctly, that it must be retained.”
—Gerda Lerner (b. 1920)