The reaction to the arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was as predictable as it was depressing.

Anyone who knows where power sits knew he would spend no more than a few hours in custody. Being held on remand is usually only for those who can’t afford “justice”.

Plea deals are designed for two reasons – to give the rich an escape for accountability and to deny the not-rich their day in court. We never ask why there is such a delay in jury trials, why so many people are sitting in our jails without conviction.

Obviously nuance is needed, and courts are supposed to weigh up individual factors such as ongoing risk to victims, particularly in cases of domestic and family violence. When they get that wrong, there can be, and are, devastating consequences.

It’s not a set and forget issue and it’s also one where we ignore the evidence of early intervention and financial assistance in favour of the political expediency of being “tough on crime”.

But we pick and choose who we are tough on, don’t we?

The arrest warrant for Mountbatten-Windsor was not about the allegations he had sex with exploited girls who were victims of trafficking. It was for the allegations he trafficked secret information, the diplomatic version of insider trading.

We judge poor people by the company they keep – socialise with or related to a bikie or drug dealer? You’re officially “an associate” to police. So why should anyone be surprised that the man whose former wife and close companion was caught on tape in 2010 selling access to him to a journalist posing as a fake sheikh for £500,000, may have also been selling access and information himself?

Sarah Ferguson admitted at the time it was Mountbatten-Windsor who had suggested what she should charge for the access. On the tabloid reporter’s tape, she says: “That opens up everything........

© The New Daily