Robin Tilbrook’s comments have left everybody in my office thoroughly perplexed. Is he unaware that those accused of a crime are considered innocent until proven guilty? Will he, on behalf of the English Democrats, stand up and call for the repeal of this longstanding approach to criminal law? If he accepts that an accused is innocent until proven guilty then I, at least, cannot see immediately why bail should be decided wholly upon ‘good old-fashioned English common sense’.

Clearly, the seriousness of an offence has a bearing upon the grant of bail, but it is not the be all and end all; there are far too many factors to even begin discussing here.

Personally, I’m also confused by the line about the racist comments ‘… it would not even have been a criminal offence before the Public Order Act’. Rape by a husband upon his wife was not considered an offence before R v R. Presumably there was also a point in history when murder was not considered an offence. So what?

Perhaps Mr Tilbrook should spend more time focusing on the spelling of England on his party’s website (where it currently appears as Egland) and not on inventing problems in the criminal justice system for him and his party to ‘solve’.

Nicholas Diable, Erica Peat & Diable, London E3