I have mixed feeling about today's Lords' ruling that evidence gained through torture is inadmissible in a British court.
Not mixed in the sense that I think the Lords might have been wrong. But mixed in the sense of feeling some horror that this should be a story at all. It is like reading that 'Lords find abolishing elections is not a good thing' or 'Lords find that executing opposition politicians is a bad idea'. How did we get to the stage where evidence gained through torture was even possibly considered valid?