Nachilongo Doreen v. PP 400 [2014] 5 MLRA had arranged for the flight and hotel for her. Initially she had brought a small bag with her but after she went shopping with Natasha, her clothes could no longer fit into the small bag. Natasha then gave her a bigger bag, P17. [13] The bag P17 was not locked. In Johannesburg, the bag was scanned at the airport prior to it being checked in and nothing suspicious was detected in P17. She departed from Johannesburg to Kuala Lumpur on 23 February 2011 and she reached KLIA at about 6.00am. At KLIA, she was detained by the Immigration Authority for about eight hours. She was only cleared at about 2pm. She then went to an office at KLIA where she had to fill up a form before the Management handed over the bag P17 to her. [14] The learned trial judge had in her mind the principle in Mat v. Public Prosecutor [1963] 1 MLRH 400 that the story of the defence need not be true or be believed. The learned trial judge considered the defence of the appellant that she came to Malaysia to look for job opportunities and that within the eight hours gap before the appellant collected bag P17, someone could have opened the bag and placed the drugs inside it. [15] The following is the finding of the learned trial judge on the defence of looking for a job: “3. If the accused really wanted to look for a job in Malaysia, why would she spend a lot of money for flight ticket and other expenses, to travel from Zambia to Malaysia without any preparation for job hunting, while she could save time and cost by, eg surfing the internet, make an online application or apply in writing. It is unreasonable for the accused to claim that she did not know how to do a search in the internet while at the same time she claimed to have graduated from a teaching institution and comes from a middle class family; 4. What made the accused’s story more improbable is that she claimed to be not proficient in English. However, amongst the items found in her bag (P17) were notebooks with her name written in good English by the accused herself. When the learned Deputy Public Prosecutor asked the accused to read the notebooks, the accused showed displeasure and reluctantly read the notebooks; 5. ... 6. The accused said that if she did not succeed in securing any job in Malaysia, her second choice was to enroll in a local college. However, she admitted that she did not bring any document to support her educational background or her result transcript; 7. ... 8. The accused planned to stay in Hilton Hotel during her visit to Malaysia. When the accused was arrested, she only had an equivalent sum of RM860.00 on her. Why would the accused choose to stay in a five star hotel and how was she going to pay for her expenses while she was in the process of job hunting;