Re: 鈥淲ilson-Raybould must explain the logic behind her decision,鈥� comment, March 3.
The writer asks for an explanation of why the former federal attorney general decided not to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin prosecution. The rest of the article goes on to offer hypothetical explanations, all of them entirely negative and personal.
If one were to consider any positive explanations, two suggest themselves: First, the director of public prosecutions, in full possession of the facts and laws, decided that the case was not eligible for a deferred-prosecution agreement. Second, the judge to whom SNC-Lavalin appealed this decision agreed.
Indeed, if Jody Wilson-Raybould had stepped in and overruled these two decisions, that would require an explanation.
Janet Bavelas
Saanich
