The Court has said we do not have to pay the money back.

The evidence and a court of law says he did.

The Court has not yet said whether it will take the case.

The court said that was a matter best left to the House.

I don't understand how the court could say this even back in the 1920's!

That's what the British high court had 2 say 2day.

The court said the case seemed to have more to do with politics than crime.

But, as the Court said, obviously there is no major difference.

But the court said it saw "no room to hold him for another crime."

The rest is merely what the court will also say when they hear.