Bazile - //andy
Do i detect a 'softening' of attitude to this family from you ?
(Apologies if i'm incorrect) but weren't you arguing , when this matter first hit the headlines ; that ( words to the effect ) the law is the law, and if they are offering a service to the public , then they can't discriminate against particular customers and their requests ? //
I wouldn't say I had a 'hard' attitude that needed to be softened to he honest.
My position when the case arose was, as you say, that the couple are not above the law, and the legal process should be followed - as it was.
But - champion of the law as I am - I also appreciate that the very same legal process that brought the case allows the couple to appeal, and I am fully behind their rights to lodge that appeal.
As I have said, without fresh evidence, I believe the appeal will fail, but the legal process will again be followed.
It's logical that the legal system is unlikely to go against a judge's ruling simply because a guilty party appeals - that would open the system to ridicule as any judge risked his judgement being questioned and overturned for ever single case he prosecuted.
So, in my (amateur) view, the couple will need evidence not presented at the original case - simply saying, effectively, that they didn't agree with the verdict - and who could blame them - is not enough for the judgement to be overturned.