I agree with Reaper. The case against him would be flimsy. He could claim that the girl cried out so he took her hand to comfort her, then the father looked around .... barristers could have a field day with the case. He could say he caught her arm as she was about to fall ....
The abhorrent thing here, which is the thread title of this thread and the other one, is the cultural acceptability bias. It surely could not be an acceptable defence to say "it's OK where I come from". If that really was to have been his defence it should have failed immediately. It should never have been mentioned by Saines. IMO he really is unfit to be a member of the judiciary.
