ONE of the most important points about the Louise Woodward case is to realise why she was found guilty on so little real evidence.

The defence made a bad mistake in using the lawyer who got OJ Simpson acquitted. The psychology of this is because, from his actions and the evidence, the verdict on OJ Simpson of not guilty was the wrong one in most people's thinking and now this lawyer was not going to get away with it a second time.

Further, the mother of the dead baby was so intent on insisting that Louise is guilty. In court, before the jury's verdict was announced, she gave a lengthy tear-jerking speech in which she said that her three year old son, Brendan, had told her that he had asked his dead brother: "How was it up there in heaven today?"

I can't believe it. It was a sympathy-seeking tear-jerker. She has even featured in a video tape where she is coaxing him to say that Louise killed his brother, but he tells her she is wrong: "Louise loved Mattie," he replies. She then asks if Louise ever hit him (Brendan) and he said that he loved Louise and Louise loved him and Louise loved Mattie.

And what about the evidence where the baby's injuries are shown to be old ones and this evidence disappearing?

ALBERT J MORRIS, Clement View, Nelson.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.