Reporting the Alex Salmond Trial 261

 in Uncategorized by

Imagine you had not seen the reporting of the Julian Assange hearing by myself or by any other citizen journalist. Imagine you had only seen the reports of the mainstream media. What impression would you have of that hearing solely from the MSM and how would it differ from the impression you have now?

Every fact I reported from the Assange hearing was just that, a fact. Nobody, anywhere, has made a single claim that anything I reported to have happened, did not happen. Yet the mainstream media simply did not report 99% of the facts of the case which I reported.

Then realise this. For all the key evidential parts of Alex Salmond’s trial, the public and citizen journalists will be excluded and only the MSM will be permitted to be there. How thorough, how accurate and how fair do you think MSM reporting of the case will be? The MSM hate Alex Salmond as a danger to the status quo, just as they hate Julian Assange.

At least for the Assange trial I could queue from 6am and get in with the public. The public will themselves be excluded from the Salmond evidence sessions. I went to the court on Thursday and was told not to queue on Monday as there will be no parts of the trial open to the public that day. I was told to queue from early Tuesday morning with the possibility of a brief admission to the courtroom for the public at some point on that day, by no means guaranteed.

I have therefore applied to be admitted to the trial as a journalist. This is the email I sent to the courts service. I apologise that circumstances compelled me to blow my own trumpet, but the application is quite true if embarrassingly immodest. I am indeed the most widely read journalist resident in Scotland. The fact my journalism does not reach its audience by the medium of dead trees, or by TV news broadcast to an ever-shrinking audience of gullible old people, does not change that.

CRAIG MURRAY
To: [email protected]

Thu, 5 Mar at 16:53

Sirs,

I am arguably the most read journalist resident in Scotland. We have undoubtedly the most popular and most read new media website in Scotland, https://www.craigmurray.org.uk.
Our regular readership is higher than the regular readership of the Scotsman or Herald, and on a good day higher than any Scottish newspaper. I have 75,000 followers on Twitter.

Last week our daily coverage of the Julian Assange hearing reached many millions of readers all around the world.

Your Man in the Public Gallery – Assange Hearing Day 1

Many hundreds of thousands followed the hearing on my own website, and in the English language the article was republished on hundreds of websites worldwide, as proven by a google search of an unique exact phrase from the article, which gives 869 returns
.
My Assange hearing articles last week were in addition translated and republished in languages including French, German, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese (Iberian and Brazilian), Norwegian, Japanese and probably several others of which I do not know.

It is not just a question of quantity. This is reporting of the highest quality. My Assange case reporting was commended in the strongest terms by some of the UK’s most famous journalists, including Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger

former Daily Mail chief columnist Peter Oborne

And the legendary investigative journalist John Pilger

I would therefore be grateful if you would organise media accreditation for me to cover the Salmond case. In the modern world, the best journalists and those with the biggest audiences no longer work for the corporate or state media. Plainly, I am a journalist.

Craig Murray

The response to my email was of course to send me a form to fill, and that form made absolutely plain that it expected “journalists” to be from the established corporate and state media. Amusingly it also said the media organisation must have “balanced journalism”. That is of course another lie by the authorities. They have accredited the BBC, Sky and the Daily Telegraph, for example. They have not the slightest interest in balance, merely in excluding non right wing thinkers.

I have not heard back yet on my application. There is an irony that this blog might be regarded as a significant medium of publication for purposes of being threatened with jail for (ridiculous) alleged contempt of court, but not be regarded as a publication for the purposes of attending in court.

I still await a decision. If my accreditation is not accepted, my ability to report proceedings will be severely constrained. My strong suspicion is that being a good and accurate reporter with a wide international readership will appear to the authorities precisely the grounds on which they should try to exclude me. If excluded, I will provide what reporting I can, in any event, and gain entry at least to that part where the public are admitted, while finding ways to report what I cannot directly witness: I already know a great deal more than I am permitted to tell you about the facts of the case.

——————————————

Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations



 

Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]

Alternatively:

Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

261 thoughts on “Reporting the Alex Salmond Trial”

1 2 3 4
  • Steve

    Just a thought… If you (Craig) are excluded… Alex is himself employed by “the media”… Is he therefore allowed to report his own “trial”? Could he wear two hats as both defendant and reporter? I know it would be seen as biased reporting, but then, so is all the MSM these days…..

  • Vivian O'Bliviion

    Have written to [email protected]

    I understand that your current guidelines on criteria which renders legitimacy as a court journalist places undue emphasis on the individual being in the employ of a media organisation.
    I am writing in support of “citizen journalist”, Mr Craig Murray. As a subscriber to Mr Murrays blog, I rely on his observations and reporting to remain informed of news and current affairs. This subscription takes the form of a monthly payment and the service provided by Mr Murray cannot be considered any less worthy of accreditation as a court journalist than any application by an employee of a mainstream media organisation.
    On the subject of citizen journalism as a concept, in my opinion the reporting of an experienced and skilled citizen journalist (this being an accurate description of the output of Mr Murray) can in point of fact offer greater verisimilitude than the mainstream media where consideration is given to the revenue stream of advertising. As a hypothetical example, would reporting of events in a conflict zone be filtered by the knowledge that advertising revenue is being accrued from corporations engaged in supplying weapons to the conflict.
    While I appreciate that availability of seating in the Press area will have its limitations, a simple search will provide assurance that the blog maintained by Mr Murray has a substantially greater readership than much of the “legacy media” that is routinely given accreditation as journalists.

    Name and address supplied as a Scottish citizen.

    • Paul Short

      Reading your comment Mr O, I have done similarly:
      Dear Madam/Sir
      I write to add my name to those urging that Mr Craig Murray be accorded accreditation as a journalist to be present at, and report on the Alec Salmond case due to start this coming week. I understand that accreditation has already been accorded to other journalists (including I believe, though I may be wrong, the Guardian, which sells something under 10,000 copies print in Scotland on a daily basis). Mr Murray is a globally recognised journalist online and has a readership far in excess of any print publications in Scotland. I believe he has already applied for accreditation, and I urge you to accord this. Excluding Mr Murray on the grounds of not producing a print edition of his journalistic output would be anomalous in this age, and any other exclusion could not but be considered – and will be considered globally – as politically biased. I am sure this perception is not what you intend or would welcome. Again, the provision of accreditation and a place in the court amongst other journalists is something that is of huge importance to public understanding of justice in this country (meaning both Scotland and the UK), and as we are all aware, exclusion of reputable journalists, such as Mr Murray, simply allows for inaccurate information to be spread about. I trust you will accommodate those of us making this request.
      I add that I am a paying subscriber to Mr Murray’s output, and am resident in Scotland.

      Enough people writing in can have an effect, I should add, something seen in the excellent Labour Start blog, where many people around the world have been aided by the fact that the powers that be seldom like any sort of visibility, and will frequently act to end matters rapidly, looking for others less visible to work on.

      • Vivian O'Blivion

        You and I hardly counts as a pile on. Suggest all followers contribute (including international followers) e-mail the Scottish legal authorities demanding Craig’s access to the trial.

  • Magic Robot

    You are one of the big guns, now Mr. Murray. God keep you well for the fight.

  • Republicofscotland

    Here’s a thought Craig, if you personally cannot gain access to the court, is there a credited reliable journalist that you know and trust that could on your behalf gain access.

    I realise the information would be secondhand, but you could tweak it to your own distinctive style of writing.

  • Mary

    More of the same state control, this time it was the state broadcaster at work.

    Robert Peston: ‘BBC pulled my indyref report over backlash from Alex Salmond fears’
    Robert Peston has claimed that the BBC pulled his report on the economic impact of Scottish independence minutes before broadcast because bosses feared it might offend the First Minister.
    https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/robert-peston-bbc-pulled-my-indyref-report-over-backlash-alex-salmond-fears-2280113

    Tommy rot. When has the BBC ever been concerned about what Salmond thinks?

    • MBC

      I remember Peston did a programme about the indyref, which was broadcast. I thought it was critical but fair. He pointed out the risks, the challenges and the pitfalls, but ended with saying that as far as he could make out independence would make Scotland neither richer nor poorer but that the effect of future policy after independence was unknown, and would be what its success or failure would depend on. I thought that was a very balanced assessment. Can’t see why the FM would have been offended by it. I wasn’t. But the BBC might have been.

    • David

      when I read the DM yesterday, I was surprised to see an article that wasn’t about Contagion or Meghan – I quickly worked out that it was a soft assassination job, a ‘nudge’ just before the court case. And the comments appear to have been written by the usual rabid ‘state attack employees’ of some sort.

      The Sinking National Party: With their ex-leader on trial for attempted rape, the SNP’s record in power is shameful – and nothing symbolises this better than two rusting hulks that cost £200m, write RICHARD PENDLEBURY and RACHEL WATSON
      https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8080705/The-SNPs-record-power-shameful-write-RICHARD-PENDLEBURY-RACHEL-WATSON.html

      I agree with their use of Shameful in the URL, (but it describes their article, not the SNP, or a couple of rusty ferries – Garden Bridge anyone?) and thought young journo Laura better than this, her profile on this (old a/c) public tweeting looked decent, until now? https://mobile.twitter.com/laralarajayne

  • Bibbit

    Craig, can AS’s legal team not admit you to their team so that you can blog or employ a short-hand writer to record everything verbatim? As you demonstrate in your lucid blogs on the Assange trial, ‘verbatim’ cannot convey the tone used by judge and lawyers, which alone demonstrates human emotion e.g. contempt, confidence, anger, pomposity etc.etc.

    But AS surely has some plan B as he and his team must know that the MSM are out to destroy his reputation.

    Why are not all attempted rape cases tried in the same manne?

    We live in a rotten, rotten, rotten country, where justice and innocence til judged guilty is a mirage, a will o the wisp, a daith-cannle.

  • pete

    If I have understood all this correctly it seems that Craig is being excluded from some of the court proceedings because he has less to loose than a main stream press reporter. If he were to overstep the bounds of the trial conditions by saying something that would cause the protected identity of a witness to become revealed – a matter I am sure as serious as revealing the encrypted password of a database of sensitive information – then the court would somehow be powerless to take action. I am sure that his resent case, where he was accused of calling someone a liar and thereby defaming them, has shown that he is singularly vulnerable to court action with the threat that such an action could bankrupt him.
    Surely this makes his case to be an independent reporter that much more valid. Main stream press reporters are protected by the organisations that support them, they can afford to make noble gestures now and then, Craig only had the support of dedicated followers of his writings, support that could disappear as easily as mist.
    The courts do not want to have to debate the rights and wrongs of independent reporting as they have a system that suits them well, unfortunately it is a system that also keeps us ignorant, as was shown by contrasting his reporting of the start of the Assange hearing with the stuff that appeared elsewhere.

  • Jon

    I wonder Craig if you could reproduce an image of the form in your article. I suspect a wider readership would be most interested to see the bureaucratic way in which genuine journalism is excluded from court reporting.

  • Maria Gaughan

    We need more courageous Journalists to counter the MSM propaganda machine.Everywhere the voice of the oppressed is being stifled.

  • Rhys Jaggar

    Do you have any rogue ex-security-service mole friends from your FCO days, Mr Murray?

    They might come up with novel ways of planting bugs to get you able to listen in lol….

  • Ian Foulds

    Indeed Mr. Murray, no reasonable person can dispute your (‘im’)modest submission.

    Good luck.

    If you do get Court access, I will at least know what I and my fellow Scots read from your ‘pen’, will be the truth…. and nothing but…,

    Something the media, dead tree press, their ilk and their masters have conveniently forgotten or consider to be subordinate to their imagined superiority.

    • bevin

      No. But she is absolutely demented in her promotion of successive theories to the effect that the Russian state intervened to cheat Hillary Clinton of the victory in 2016.
      Journalists have only so much credibility and Emptywheel wasted hers away on the nonsense of ‘Russiagate.’

  • Blissex

    Today the FT seems to be putting in first page the trial, in pretty stark terms, the text is as hard hitting as possible:

    “Salmond in court on 14 sexual offences charges
    […] Mr Salmond, 65, has pleaded not guilty to all the charges, which involve accusations of assault against 10 women at locations around Scotland between 2008 and 2014.
    […] In the most serious of the charges, he is accused of attempting to rape one woman at his official residence in 2014 and of the sexual assault with intent to rape another woman at the same grand Edinburgh townhouse the year before.”

    • Brianfujisan

      Sources Blisex.. Is Nicola dicing with Contempt

      And is Dugdale doing the same Contempt narrative –

      ” Kezia Dugsdinner has been yacking on radio 4, about Salmond facing “ten separate counts of sexual assault, and two of rape and attempted rape”.

      This treatment Makes so Angry..Why the Fk did Nicola sign off on this one..

      Well Good luck Alex.. And I hope you get in to court Tuesday Craig..Somehow.

      • Cubby

        Brianfujisan

        Your post says “two of rape and attempted rape”

        I am not aware of any rape charges. I am aware that one of the sexual assaults includes touching an arm and hip through clothing in a nightclub of a women. The things that go on in nightclubs these days.

  • Alastair McP

    And another thought, much under reported (possibly due to its failure to fit the narrative):
    Who cares? Alex may be many things but an angel he is not.
    This trial is predicated on him demonstrating he is just that. It’s not really a trial inquisiting a lack of any offence, but a more a questioning of his lack of a “moral perfection”, which no one I’ve ever met could claim.

    Perhaps I move on the wrong circles.

    More stength to your elbow, Craig Murray. One day, and damned soon, I’m going to get you pissed up on dodgy old blended Dimple.. You can then forget your nasty, peaty confections.. And you’re going to be bloody sorry.

    Superb work

  • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh

    The following are excerpts from the closing pages of the book ‘The Dream Shall Never Die: 100 Days that Changed Scotland Forever’ by Alex Salmond (2015) –

    “My ministerial team, including the law officers, throughout my term as First Minister are due many thanks. As some may know, I am an admirer of Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson. It is said that the one political gift that he lacked was the ability to sack people. In my case there were reasons I found this difficult. I can honestly say that I did not have a single failure in my ministerial team, and when changes were made it was because of the inevitable requirement to let other people show what they could do. This is one problem I now gladly bequeath to Nicola.

    “I led the SNP for the bulk of the last quarter of the century. Harold Macmillan once said that his problems with the Conservative Party lessened considerably once he became leader. By and large that was my experience with the SNP. What I do know is that I will never have the pleasure of leading a more committed and generous-hearted group of people. Few things make tears well up, but one that does is thinking of those generations of Scottish nationalists who put their hearts and souls into the cause with no hope whatsoever of political preferment, or even modest success. The SNP has now expanded by more than ten times within ten years. The task is to ensure that a mass-membership party retains the commitment and spirit of the men and women of principle who established and built the movement.

    “[…] In the tenth century, the monks at Deer Abbey in Aberdeenshire, a few miles from Strichen, rounded off their treasured biblical folio in Latin with the following colophon in common Gaelic (i.e. common to Scotland and Ireland). It demonstrates that Buchan wit, as biting as the wind, is rather more than a millenium old. It reads:

    ‘Be it on the conscience of anyone who reads this little book to say a prayer for the soul of the poor wretch who laboured so long in writing it.’”

    (‘The Dream Shall Never Die: 100 Days that Changed Scotland Forever’, by Alex Salmond, published by William Collins, 2015, pp 260-263)
    ——————
    FOLLOWING ARE THE ABOVE PASSAGES FROM GAELIC VERSION OF BOOK —

    Earrannan bho ‘Mairidh an Dòchas: 100 Latha a dh’Atharraich Alba Gu Bràth’, le Ailig Salmond (2015) –

    “Tha an sgioba ministreil agam, anns an robh na h-oifigearan lagha, tron teirm agam mar Phrìomh Mhinistear, airidh air taing mhòr. Mar a bhios fios aig cuid, tha meas mòr agam air a’ Phrìomhaire Làbarach, Harold Wilson. Thathar ag ràdh gur e an comas airson daoine a chur à dreuchd an aon sgil phoilitigeach a bha a dhìth air. A rèir m’ eòlais-sa, bha adhbharan ann gun robh seo fìor dhoirbh dhomh fhìn. Feumaidh mi ràdh gu h-onarach nach robh aon bhall den sgioba mhinistreil agam a dh’fhairtlich san dreuchd, agus nuair a b’fheudar dhomh atharrachaidhean a dhèanamh ’s ann air sgàth ’s gun robh agam ri cothrom a thoirt do dhaoine eile feuch an sealladh iad dhomh dè na comasan a bh’ aca fhèin. ’S e sin aon duilgheadas a tha mi a’ toirt gu deònach do Nicola.

    “Bha mi a’ stiùireadh Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba airson na mòr-chuid de na 25 bliadhna a dh’fhalbh. Thuirt Harold MacMhaoilein uair dha robh saoghal gun deach a thrioblaidean am broinn a’ Phàrtaidh Thòraidhich an lughad nuair a chaidh e na cheannard. Agus feumaidh mi ràdh ’s e sin a thachair dhomh fhìn anns a’ Phàrtaidh Nàiseanta. Tha fios agam nach bi e comasach buidheann cho dealasach agus cho fialaidh ’s a bha na daoine seo a stiùireadh a-rithist. Chan eil ach beagan nithean ann a bheireadh deòir dom shùilean, ach ’s e sin a thachras ma chuimhnicheas mi air na ginealaichean de nàiseantaich Albannach a chur an smior is an cridhe ann ’s a chùis phoilitigich gun dòchas gun soirbheachadh leotha. Tha an SNP air a dhol am meud a dheich uiread ann an deich bliadhna. ’S e an rud as cudromaiche gun cùm am pàrtaidh mòr seo ri dealas agus spiorad nan daoine onarach sin a stèidhich agus thog an iomairt againn.

    […] Anns an deicheamh linn, aig Abaid Dhèir ann an Siorrachd Obar Dheathain, faisg air Srath Eachainn, chuir na manaich crìoch air an leabhar ionmhainn Laideann aca leis an earrainn seo anns a’ Ghàidhlig choitchinn (a’ Ghàidhlig sgrìobhte a bha cumanta eadar Alba agus Èirinn). Tha na briathran a’ sealltainn gu bheil eirmse Bhuchanach, a tha cho geur ris an lannsa, nas sine na mìle bliadhna a dh’aois. Tha an earrann ag ràdh:

    ‘Gum biodh e air cogais an duine a leughas an leabhar beag seo gun guidh e airson anam an truaghain a bha cho fada ga sgrìobhadh’.”

    (‘Mairidh an Dòchas: 100 Latha a dh’Atharraich Alba Gu Bràth’, le Ailig Salmond, air fhoillseachadh le William Collins, 2015, dd 288, 289, 291)

  • kashmiri

    Well, bloggers fought strongly against proposed regulations that would require blogs to register as press, because this would come with several disadvantages, like being subject to press law. Did you think this through in the long term?

  • Keith Alan

    Whilst I am in total agreement with your defense of Julian Assange I just wonder how anyone could possibly regard the BBC as right wing?

    • Flak Blag

      The left vs. right paradigm is often used as a false dichotomy intended to legitimize representative democracy. The BBC is pro established power, regardless of the hue it is currently masquerading as.

    • Giyane

      Keith Alan

      If you are standing in front of a mirror your right hand will appear appear to be your left hand.?!

      The BBC’s demolition of Jeremy Corbyn in its election ’19 commentary would seem to be clear evidence of right wing shilling. It’s a bit early for party politicals now, 5 years before the next election, like a dog shaking a rat long after it’s dead.

      Maybe you’re just checking whether we’re all on message for the foaming Tory government that is bringing these two actions against JA and AS? Both being very right wing political show trials.

    • Laguerre

      Keith Alan
      You don’t apparently listen to the Toady programme on Radio 4, which parrots right-wing to a vast mass of the radio-listening public under the idea that it is objective, or indeed Question Time on the TV (which I don’t watch personally, so can’t say). The same is roughly true of all the R4 news programmes, with the exception of the 5.30 am news summary, where unorthodox reporting often gets through (to be changed later in the day).

  • Phil E

    Have you taken legal advice on whether the tribunals service decision about your journalist status is capable of judicial review? If it is, a quick crowd funding campaign is called for.

  • Brianfujisan

    A taste of what is to come..From Britnat Lying corrupt MSM, of which the Herald is very much a part …From the wee Ginger Dug’s piece –

    Update 4pm: Since writing this piece I’ve learned about the Herald’s Big Read about the forthcoming trial. It’s a shockingly irresponsible piece which illustrates an article about Alex Salmond’s trial with photographs of the Nazi mass murderer Adolf Eichmann, Fred and Rose West, Peter Sutcliffe, the killers of James Bulger, Myra Hyndley and Ian Brady, Dennis Nilsen, and Charles Manson, while telling us that “of course” they’re not drawing any connections between these vile creatures and the former First Minister. The piece is available in the paper’s print edition but doesn’t seem to be in the online edition (which is why I didn’t see it earlier).

    This is a foretaste of the kind of “reporting” that’s in store for us over the coming weeks. I never had a high opinion of the British media in Scotland to begin with, but even I am gobsmacked at this. It’s a sign of how desperate and afraid they are of the increasing reality of Scottish independence.

    https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2020/03/08/the-storm-clouds/

    1 – Bastards
    2 – Independence NOW
    3 – Give em hell Alex
    4 – We Know you will do your best to keep us informed on this case, Craig

  • Mist001

    I was just involved a few minutes ago with a poster on ‘Wings’ like this:
    “8 March, 2020 at 9:26 pm

    Ayeright says:

    You need witnesses to prove guilt in Scotland.

    Corroboration is required in Scots law as the evidence of a single witness, however credible, is not sufficient to prove a charge against an accused or to establish any material or crucial fact.”

    To which I replied:

    “Are you sure about that because I’m thinking in terms of the complaints of sexual assault against AS. Unless there were others present in the same room who saw what happened, then there are no witnesses whatsoever and that means the charges against AS can’t be proven.

    He has no charges to answer.

    Am I correct in my assessment here?”

    They then replied:

    “You are correct.”

    To which I once more replied:

    “It surely can’t be that simple, that a handful of people on an independence blog already know the result of the trial before it’s even started?

    It just seems too simple. I truly hope it is this simple but I get the feeling now that the PF has something that the SNP didn’t have, a ‘Plan B’ about which we currently know nothing!”

    IF this exchange is correct, then the case will be over by Monday afternoon and the PF will have some serous questions to answer. This trial can’t possibly last for weeks because there’s no case to answer.

    • Jomry

      The poster you refer to has partial knowledge.. and “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing..”.

      From Scottish LawCommission –

      “.The Moorov doctrine is a mechanism which applies where a person is accused of two or more separate offences, connected in time and circumstances. In such a case, where each of the offences charged is spoken to by a single credible witness, that evidence may corroborate, and be corroborated by, the other single witnesses, so as to enable the conviction of the accused on all the charges…”

      Which is self evidently the approach those instituting the charges have taken.

      • jake

        The Moorov doctrine is certainly one feature of Scots Law.
        So too are rules of evidence, which generally mean that there can be restrictions on just what evidence can be led.
        A standard, regular and accepted practice though is for the PF to put a variety and number of charges up to be answered thus extending the scope of matters under consideration which therefore extends the scope of the admissible evidence. At some point towards the end of the trial, having served their purpose, many of these charges are dropped. It’s purely technical .

      • Tom Welsh

        “In such a case, where each of the offences charged is spoken to by a single credible witness, that evidence may corroborate, and be corroborated by, the other single witnesses, so as to enable the conviction of the accused on all the charges…”

        It seems obvious to me that such a doctrine might be safe, if all the charges (and the accusations giving rise to them) were kept strictly secret.

        Consider two cases.

        Case 1: Person A lays an accusation, and then Person B (without knowledge of Person A’s statement) independently lays a similar accusation; subsequently a number of others lay their own accusations – none of them knowing of any of the others’ allegations.

        Case 2: Person A lays an accusation which is widely publicized; Person B sees the publicity and thinks, “hmmmm, that might have happened to me too, mightn’t it?”… and so on. As the number of allegations grows, there is more and more sensational publicity. It is easy to see how this could lead other people to jump on the bandwagon, so to speak. For whatever motives.

        To keep some people’s details (and even identities) strictly secret, while loudly talking up in public the allegations against others, seems extremely unfair.

        Whether anyone who counts could care less about the unfairness is a different matter.

    • Contrary

      Corroboration has been under scrutiny because of changes required by human rights (you cannot hold someone in custody without charge for very long) have made the requirement difficult to try domestic abuse and sexual abuse cases – the corroboration can come in the form of the accused admitting it (apparently the most common one, given time for reflection) or forensic evidence. Without either of these it would be difficult to prove, but you don’t actually need an independent witness watching it all to have corroboration.

    • Ruth

      About their being no witnesses in the room is absolute rubbish. If a complainer ‘phones a friend afterwards and says: “I was raped” that is corroboration. Witnessing a complainer in ‘distress’ is corroboration. The prosecution is using the Moorov Doctrine to nail Salmond. We have just learned that he has “lodged a special defences of consent to four of the charges”. Read into that what you will.

  • Paul Barbara

    @ Craig
    You may have missed a point in your letter to the Court – the point being that the MSM did not cover the defence case, and mostly stayed away.
    I asked a mate who is in the NUJ in Bristol (I think he is some kind of Union rep) if he could get you an NUJ card, he said no, but it was easy for you to join, so it might well be to your advantage if you do so ASAP.

    • Cubby

      Oops got that wrong. It should be the Earl of Inverness. Commonly known as randy Andy.

    • Mary

      Get your ducks (dukes) in a row Cubby. You must know that the Dick of Rothesay is P Charles. I will leave the typo.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_of_Rothesay ie establishing his family’s ownership of Scotland, and what a family!

      ‘Duke of Rothesay (Scottish Gaelic: Diùc Baile Bhòid, Scots: Duik o Rothesay) is a dynastic title of the heir apparent to the British throne, currently Prince Charles. It was a title of the heir apparent to the throne of the Kingdom of Scotland before 1707, of the Kingdom of Great Britain from 1707 to 1801, and now of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It is the title mandated for use by the heir apparent when in Scotland, in preference to the titles Duke of Cornwall (which also belongs to the eldest living son of the monarch, when and only when he is also heir apparent, by right) and Prince of Wales (traditionally granted to the heir apparent), which are used in the rest of the United Kingdom and overseas. The Duke of Rothesay also holds other Scottish titles, including those of Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. The title is named after Rothesay on the Isle of Bute, Argyll and Bute, but is not associated with any legal entity or landed property, unlike the Duchy of Cornwall.’

      RIP Diana.

      • Cubby

        Mary

        I do and that’s why I admitted my error and made it clear I was referring to his wee brother Andrew.

        The trouble is the royals have so many titles – probably more than the number of golf courses I have played in my life and it is easy to get them mixed up.

        PS Rothesay has a nice golf course with great views but somehow I doubt the Prince of Wales has made the steep climb up the first fairway to enjoy the views of the Clyde estuary and the surrounding islands.

  • Gary

    A copy paste from Wikipedia, that ‘trusted’ news source:

    “A journalist is a person who collects, writes, or distributes news or other current information to the public. A journalist’s work is called journalism.”

    You don’t need an NUJ card or membership of ‘the lobby’ to report. Indeed, there have been ructions recently at number 10 over this very issue and Downing Street recognises ‘Guido Fawkes’ Blog as journalists for the purposes of No 10 briefings much to the chagrin of the ‘Westminster Lobby’ whose rules are being torn up by the blog’s ‘journalists’ If a right wing blog which states that it reports “Rumours and Plots” from Westminster can be consider journalists then someone who reports factually from a trial (among other things) can be called a journalist much more readily…

  • Gary

    PS I’ve just realised that they may use this opportune moment to either use the ‘cease and desist’ type letter against you and bar entry OR take the opportunity to charge you (possibly to drop the charge AFTER the trial, possibly not)

    I hope that firstly, the Scottish Judiciary isn’t as easily cowed/bought as to stoop to these measures and secondly they will not wish to be SEEN to be preventing open journalism on the case. Anything with the WHIFF of keeping journalists away from a story makes it look like they’re covering something up. Sending a letter (as they have done) can be blamed on an over zealous junior employee, taking it further couldn’t. As to preventing you reporting they would make themselves look foolish, aside from making it more difficult I don’t think they will prevent you from attending…

  • Giyane

    In this trial about personal relationships I would like to point out that Big Brother has the capability of universal and 24 hour surveillance. The technology is comprehensive. In special cases skin implanted devices can be activated to record events outside the bugs in buildings and phones.

    My sister recently told me that she and her friend were worried about someone who appeared to be having a breakdown , so her friend phoned the police to look out for this distressed person. The police phoned my sister back and she asked where they got her number from. ‘ oh , he didn’t answer , and our phone records say you are one of his close friends.

    Anyway they did find the person , on a frosty night with no trousers on. Imho it’s extremely unlikely that AS mobile, residence car and maybe person are not bugged.
    I am certain all of mine are and I’m a very unimportant person in the scheme of things.

    The court should insist on corroboration of evidence by GCHQ recordings. Its 2020, the year after Big Brother fixed the election,

  • Piotr Berman

    I must say that when Scottish court that is probably run by Scotsmen and Scotsladies can outdo the English on authoritarianism, the future independent Scotland will face some problems. Why professional rumor mongers, a.k.a. journalists are trusted more with delicate details of the case than random members of the public? The latter have a larger chance of being decent and unbiased. And when we deal with balanced professional rumor mongers… my head hurts.

    Seems that both Murray and Salmond are on “a little list
    Of society offenders who might well be underground
    And who never would be missed — who never would be missed!”

  • Emma

    I hear there are a lot of “court insiders” at Edinburgh High Court 😉 It will be interesting to hear what they have to say.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.