Lindy Chamberlain was the scapegoated woman, the officially sanctioned target. Hey folks, come around with your rotten tomatoes and eggs, it's fine, blow off some steam, vent your fury, have a good time, throw as much shit at the murderous bitch as you want, she deserves it. Want to speak up for her? Don't dare, we'll put you in the stocks too - and if you're unlucky we'll tie you to the stake as well and light the pyre.
Lindy was beyond the pale, outside all social protection - and the "Left" (and self proclaimed "Feminists"), ran like scalded cats from the witch.
Lindy was eventually vindicated by new evidence and a small band of courageous, non-politically aligned supporters who had the integrity and intelligence to withstand the tidal wave of derision. If that had not happened, "Left" publications like New Matilda would still happily publish vitriol about her and call anyone who didn't support the popular belief Lindy was a throat-slitting Satanist a "Nutter." However, they're now restrained from that path because it's no longer the "Done thing" or "Politically correct," thanks to the efforts of a brave few.
What makes me say this? Because Schapelle is our new scapegoated woman (the constant object of foul, sexist abuse and smear) - and New Matilda has joined in the fun, actively inviting their readership to mock her more than once and vowing to write about her only in the most negative terms. They also ridicule the grassroots justice campaign fighting to clear her name, even though some high profile and well respected people like Christine Assange (Julian's Mother), added her voice to the cause, as well as well as well known human rights activist and anti-racism campaigner Gerry Georgatos (in articles like this).
Even if Schapelle's guilty (which she isn't), this level of vitriol and focus is quite bizarre. She did 10 years in appalling conditions for a relatively minor "Crime," how many more pounds of flesh does the baying pack want? Smell the acrid smoke of a witch burning much? Doesn't New Matilda have some corporate criminals and/or genocidal despots to focus on, who deserve exposure?
When asked to justify their belief in Schapelle's guilt, New Matilda either refuses to reply or throws further insults and ad hominem attacks - and if anyone points out all official sources completely deny a commercial flow of marijuana FROM Australia, TO Bali (ever), they go purple with rage and scream even more abuse (via Twitter usually). They also refuse to speak to retired senior Australian Customs officer Allan Kessing, who asserts (without reservation), Schapelle was the innocent victim of airport corruption. They've never given any explanation for that refusal, just as they've never give an explanation for ignoring the mountain of documentation (obtained via FOI legislation), which proves Schapelle's innocence and underlines official corruption. Seems criminal airport staff like this don't exist in New Matilda's utopia.
So here's a challenge for you New Matilda, go ahead, write an article "Proving" Schapelle's "Guilt," and do it without defaming her family (because you'll get your arse successfully sued if you do), and do it without defaming a dead man just because you can. And when you write it, also watch the social media feedback on your sites like a hawk, because if any comments step over the mark into the realm of defaming the living, you'll be sued for that too.
So succinctly put, either step up to the mark or crawl back into your hole.