Buckdog

Seems to me that would be the basis of the defence argument. There can be no bribe because no one has been charged with offering or paying the bribe.

The Royal Conservative Mounted Police really became contortionists of logic to contend that Nigel Wright did not wrong because of lack of "corrupt intention."

It stands as an indictment of the state police agency to go to such lengths to ignore the abundant evidence of corrupt intention such as the promise to intervene with top Tory senators to see to it that the audit report "went easy on" Duffy.

Without more, that's all the corruption the cops needed to find but appear to have worked so very hard to avoid.

There is one possibility which I've noted since this was first announced. They may not be charging him so as to maintain his credibility as a witness against someone. Now, one would of course presume Duffy. There is another possibility though, that this is the first step in going after an even bigger fish, and in this chain that can only be one person, our PM himself. Do I know this to be the case, or even think it likely, no. Do I though think the possibility can be dismissed as an explanation for how Wright avoided being charged for offering the bribe Duffy is accused of receiving, no as well.

It is more probable that this was done for the prosecution of Duffy as it isn't the most uncommon thing for the Crown to not charge someone they need as a major witness against someone they see as the primary/bigger offender, which Duffy is clearly being treated as here. The idea that his credibility as a witness may also being preserved for possible actions against Harper himself down the road coming out of this trial is a long shot, but cannot be entirely ignored either.

That is my suspicion as to why Wright avoided the charge while Duffy didn't. For what it's worth.