But why, it's a fact, they do sometimes get it wrong ah but rape yeah so nobody is allowed to speak rationally.
They get some wrong and this is a very unique case where a man was convicted entirely without physical evidence or even an eye witness statement against him
It's very clear there's scope to think this might have been a duff decision.
I know what you're trying to say and I agree with part of it but it's really not his place to be casting judgement on the criminal justice system, certainly not when talking about a specific case like this.