AFTER many years of reading your newspaper I was astounded to read that you had tried to expose shops selling cigarettes to children, yet you have obviously purposely used a girl who seems to look at least 23.

At no point in any of the photographs does the Miss Walters look like the 15-year-old you are stating that she is.

Even the clothes, jacket and pearls does not even point in that direction. I do not condone these shops selling to the underage, but I feel you should be be more realistic in your investigations.

If you are to expose these shops who are blatantly breaking the law you should be showing them serving a child who looks under the legal age of 18, and not by tricking them into serving a child who apparently looks much older than the legal age.

I have no connection to any of these shops and to my knowledge have never even been in them, but I feel you are misrepresenting their legal obligation to check ages for people of 18 years old.

As Kiren Turna of the Just Booze stated in your report: “If I doubt anyone’s age and they have no ID, I refuse to sell to them.” But if these other shops didn't doubt her age in the first place they would not probably ask for her ID.

Your report is only showing how hard it is for these shops to recognise how old this young person looks and not necessarily selling to the underage on purpose.

Colin Brown, Carterton