That makes the decision not to prosecute even more baffling

The case was dropped because "On the evidence available, it is not possible to show exactly who was responsible for placing the doll in the window."

Fair enough even if a bit wet - if there is a long list of people who could have put it there, and you can't prove which one did, the whole thing becomes a bit tricky

But then read the last para:

"The dispute centred around whether the golly was a deliberate act of racism ? or, as Mrs Mason insisted, that it simply ended up on the window sill when she tidied it up with her grandson?s other toys."

Now THAT is an admission that SHE put it there. SO it would then simply come down to her MOTIVE - was it an innocent accident as she says, or was it deliberate? THAT is a very triable issue.

Posted By: Old Git, Oct 24, 13:54:19