Admissible evidence

In his neatly analysed write-up, Mr. R.K. Raghavan (Nov. 30) has summed up the circumstances leading to the conviction of the Talwars. The case shows that it is time self-imposed regulations are put in place to ensure responsible media reporting; any insinuating report should be dealt with in all seriousness. There should be a Lakshman Rekha that must be honoured by the media.

G. Ramachandran,

Thiruvananthapuram

In criminal law, while convicting an accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the main aspect that has to be taken care of is to ensure that the entire chain of events are complete and form a cycle. In this case, it was. That said, the investigative agencies should accept their share of blame. The constant flip-flops during the course of the investigation, and even the way the closure report was handled, are a blot on them. Being a top investigative agency, the CBI should upgrade the ways it handles forensic evidence and ensure that it is on a par with agencies such as Scotland Yard and the FBI.

T. Anand Raj,

Chennai

The verdict delivered in the Aarushi Talwar murder case is a clear message to criminals who assume that they can get away by destroying evidence at the scene of crime. As the circumstances suggested the involvement of the doctor couple in the double murder, the CBI’s investigation also relied on this. Those who claim that the judgment amounts to a miscarriage of justice as there is no direct evidence, and that it was delivered on the basis of circumstantial evidence, must do well to remember that circumstances cannot lie.

K. Mahabub Ali,

New Delhi