Shabby han­dling of case

Sunday Express - - LETTERS -

A sec­ond EU ref­er­en­dum will not solve the Brexit is­sue as the elec­torate will vote again to leave (“Bri­tain faces Brexit trade disas­ter”, De­cem­ber 2).

Parliament voted over­whelm­ingly to trig­ger Ar­ti­cle 50 so the de­fault po­si­tion if Theresa May’s deal is re­jected, and it will be, par­tic­u­larly now the le­gal ad­vice is known, is to exit with no deal.

The Ir­ish bor­der ques­tion re­mains un­changed. The Gov­ern­ment says it is not ready for this. Why not? Prepa­ra­tions were sup­posed to be well in progress in the sum­mer.

As for the sup­posed dam­age to the econ­omy, this will be noth­ing com­pared to the dam­age a Jeremy Cor­byn gov­ern­ment would in­flict.

Be­sides, I can­not see the ri­ot­ing French or Ger­man car man­u­fac­tur­ers be­ing happy so the Brus­sels de­ci­sion-mak­ers would be quickly forced to find a proper deal. Peter Outen, Brent­wood, Es­sex So many ques­tions hang over the ex­tra­or­di­nary way in which this case against a thiev­ing carer was han­dled that Liz Ker­shaw should seek a ju­di­cial re­view (“My mother’s carer left her broke and bro­ken... like our jus­tice sys­tem that let her walk free”, De­cem­ber 2).

Why was the fam­ily not in­formed be­fore the trial that the court was only go­ing to con­sider £20,000 of the total amount stolen and why were no rea­sons given?

Why was Claire Davis then given a sus­pended sen­tence, de­spite her ad­mis­sion of guilt?

What too of the lazy po­lice re­sponse ini­tially? Some­thing stinks here, and the At­tor­ney Gen­eral needs to look into it. Deirdre Ma­son, Lon­don pre­vent this from hap­pen­ing is to vote Labour at the next gen­eral elec­tion.

A Gov­ern­ment led by Jeremy Cor­byn will wreck Bri­tain fi­nan­cially and cul­tur­ally.

Eco­nomic mi­grants will then see no fu­ture in breach­ing our por­ous bor­ders and no longer tar­get this coun­try. Hugh Jones, Cardiff

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.