If you were wrongly charged, say with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, what would be the first thing you would want to declare in your public statement?  That you didn’t do it?  That you had been wrongly accused?  That you were confident the courts would find you innocent?  You would think so, after all wouldn’t your first reaction be to defend yourself?

Not so with Rebekah Brooks.  She may be defiant, as the Guardian stated this morning, but she’s not defensive.  Her main criticism is that the case will be an “expensive sideshow and a waste of public money”.  Even her husband, while trying to sound supportive, cannot find the words to defend her.  In his statement he says “I have no doubt that the lack of evidence against me will be borne out in court, but I have grave doubts that my wife can ever get a fair trial”

Yet Rebekah Brooks is “baffled” by the decision to charge her.  If she is guilty, does this mean that she believes herself to be above such charges?  Perverting the course of justice is not considered a trifling matter and those found guilty often receive a custodial sentence.  As unfair as our legal system may often appear, allowing people to get away with destroying evidence would make a complete mockery of it.