 Following the release of mum Carla Foster, who was imprisoned under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, for illegally terminating her pregnancy using abortion pills sent through the post. In today's MetroTalk readers are questioning why the mum was ever sentenced under the 162-year-old act in the first place. They ask if the judge should be held accountable for his poor judgement now that she's free, and whether it is time we reconsidered such outdated laws? On another note, it seems some of you are showing very little sympathy to Nigel Farage's banking troubles. Was Coutts right to kick him out, or should big businesses show impartiality to their customers? Let us know what you think. Why has this archaic law not been updated since Victorian times? Women's rights campaigners in Westminster, London after taking part in a march from the Royal Courts of Justice calling for decriminalisation of abortion (Picture: PA) The decision of the appeal court judges to free mum-of-three Carla Foster is a victory for common sense. She should never have been jailed in the first place. It's quite incredible that women can still be sent to prison because of a law dating back to 1861! Why has this archaic law not been updated since Victorian times? Scott, West London METRO TALK - HAVE YOUR SAY Let us know what you think... Start a text with VIEWS followed by your comment, name and where you live to 65700. Standard network charge applies. Or email mail@ukmetro.co.uk Helpline for Views, Rush-Hour Crush and Good Deed Feed: 020 3615 0600. Remember, you are more likely to be published if you provide your name and location with your Full T&Cs here. Metro.co.uk is a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Comments may be edited for reasons of legality, clarity or space. It is very good news indeed){kind=link}
NEWS… BUT NOT AS YOU KNOW IT
Following the release of mum Carla Foster, who was imprisoned under the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, for illegally terminating her pregnancy using abortion pills sent through the post.
In today’s MetroTalk readers are questioning why the mum was ever sentenced under the 162-year-old act in the first place.
They ask if the judge should be held accountable for his poor judgement now that she’s free, and whether it is time we reconsidered such outdated laws?
On another note, it seems some of you are showing very little sympathy to Nigel Farage’s banking troubles. Was Coutts right to kick him out, or should big businesses show impartiality to their customers?