I listened to radio 4 this morning

Before the Archers started.

There was a female part-time judge on amongst others, talking about the case in Crete where a husband picked up his children and walked off his 6th floor balcony while holding them. They were there on holiday to try to re-build the relationship, but the wife had just told him she was leaving and things were finished. He has been found Not Guilty of murdering his son, who died in the fall (both he and the daughter survived). The judges comment disturbed me - her conclusion was that of all the evidence brought up in court, it was emails showing that the wife had been fooling around 5 years previously that made a difference.

She suggested that in a case like that, blaming the woman was always good for sympathy, and an effective tack in an otherwise hopeless defence case.

While what she says may be true generally, it concerns me that someone in such a position can make so shallow a judgement in this case, based on such a small shred of evidence (the quote ABOUT the email) from such an unreliable source (the News Of The World). I hope she's never sitting if I ever go to court.