I am sorry to have upset poor Alfred Griscti (‘Columnist should know better’, May 12). He was apoplectic about my support for the rule of law and the presumption of innocence until proved guilty that underpins it.

My article on Egrant-gate did not attempt to “exonerate the guilty”, as he asserted. I was simply seeking indisputable evidence that the people accused of these “crimes” – as a section of a kangaroo court of public opinion has asserted – are guilty as charged.

The right to a fair trial is a cardinal requirement of the rule of law. Fairness means fairness to both sides.

Doubtless, Griscti would approve of the judge at the Old Bailey in the 1840s who, after a trial lasting two minutes and 53 seconds, directed the jury as follows: “Gentlemen, I suppose you have no doubt? I have none” and convicted the accused of theft. I am glad to say most of us have moved on since then.

I hope he will read my next three articles assessing Joseph Muscat, Simon Busuttil and the electoral verdict with a more open mind and a better comprehension of what I write than he has displayed in his letter.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.