Court was to be held on Oct. 10th,
 (according to the judge's motion at the adjournment of the Oct. 3rd, hearing),
 but because the judges, prosecution team, defense team,
 and defendants did not appear in court on Oct. 10th,
 court was not held on Oct. 10th.

Notes of the Oct. 13th, 2006, hearing.
 Please remember that these notes are not official transcripts of
 what has taken place in the court room, none of my updates have been.
 I have an unofficial translator telling me the essence of what is being said,
 and I then write what I'm told down.
 I have much more detailed notes,
 but I prefer not to share those with the masses in the chance that I have gotten something wrong.

Six of the seven defendants arrived in court at 2:15 P.M., they sat in the
 audience. Hardi Sugumol was not present. Six prosecutors were present.
 None of the defense lawyers were present.

The judges entered the court room at 2:19 P.M., and court was called to order.
 For the first fifteen minutes the judges, prosecutors,
 and two of the defendants (Anthonius Wamang and Ishak Onawame) took turns in speaking.
 Mr. Wamang stood up from the bench in the audience and spoke.
 He said that he did not want to talk because there was still one of them missing,
 Hardi Sugumol.
He said that they wanted all of them to be together to express themselves,
 and that they were all still reluctant to participate in this process.
 He said that he wanted Mr. Sugumol healthy and sitting with them.
 Mr. Onawame said that Mr. Sugumol should be in court so that there
 would be no one to contest what was said in court.

The prosecution read a letter about the health of Mr. Sugumol, and went on t=
o say that the letter was not complete. They stated that Mr. Sugumol was not=
 healthy and that he could not attend court, but that further information wo=
uld be given at a later date. The judge asked the defendants what they had t=
o say about the letter. Mr. Ishak Onawame said that a doctor had visited all=
 of them that morning (he gave the time of the visit) and Mr. Onawame went o=
n to describe Mr. Sugumol=E2=80=99s health condition, and stated his concern=
 for Mr. Sugumol=E2=80=99s health. He also spoke about his concern for all o=
f their safety while in detention. He went on to speak about three elements:=
 culture, religion, and modernality.=20
=20
The judge acknowledged Mr. Sugumol=E2=80=99s medical condition and stated th=
at a letter should be submitted so that they could take it into consideratio=
n. The judge stated that when there was an official letter, then Mr. Sugumol=
 would be given further medical treatment. The lead judge asked if all defen=
dants present agreed with what Mr. Wamang and Mr. Ishak Onawame had said, an=
d Mr. Onawame stood up and said yes they all agreed.  At 2:35 P.M, Mr. Onawa=
me said that they were going, and they all left the courtroom to return to d=
etention.
=20
The prosecution began reading the indictments for each of the seven defendan=
ts and gave their justifications for those recommendations by using articles=
 from the Indonesian Penal Code to defend those recommendations. These sente=
ncing recommendations were read from 2:35 P.M. to 4:35 P.M. If you are inter=
ested in the article numbers let me know and I=E2=80=99ll send them to you.=20
=20
Anthonius Wamang (also indicted by a US grand jury): A twenty year sentence,=
 reduced by time already in detention, and a 1,000 Rupia fine for the court=20=
costs, was recommended. I=E2=80=99m told that the fine is based on the 1964=20=
Criminal Procedure and would be the equivalent of about $1,000 US.
=20
Joni Kasamol and Yulianus Deikme: A fifteen year sentence, reduced by time a=
lready in detention, and a 1,000 Rupia fine for court costs, was recommended=
.=20
=20
Ishak Onawame, Esau Onawame, Hardi Sugumol, and Yarius Kiwak: An eight year=20=
sentence, reduced by time already in detention, and a 1,000 Rupia fine for c=
ourt costs, was recommended.=20
=20
The prosecution did not give any reason for not asking for the death penalty=
 or for a life  sentence  for Wamang. According to the Dutch system, 20 year=
s is the most that can be asked for if not asking for a death sentence or li=
fe in prison.
=20
The judges stated that the next court hearing would be on Tuesday, Oct. 31st=
. Court was adjourned at 4:35 P.M.=20
=20
With this court session on Oct. 13th, the sentencing phase has begun. The ne=
xt hearing on Oct. 31st, is to be the opportunity for the defense team to gi=
ve a rebuttal to the recommended sentences given by the prosecution. The ses=
sion after the Oct. 31st, will again be the prosecutions=E2=80=99 opportunit=
y to give their rebuttal to the defenses=E2=80=99 recommendation. The sessio=
n after that will be the last opportunity for the prosecution to rebut the d=
efenses=E2=80=99 recommendation. The last session will be when the judges re=
nder their verdict.=20
=20
If you have any questions, please don=E2=80=99t hesitate to ask.
=20
=20