I have received very many messages waiting for my take on the Alex Salmond acquittal. There is much to say and a need to take serious decisions about exactly when to reveal various crucial elements of information, because while the truth is vital, there can be a legitimate question at which moment it does most good. The most stunning information is in danger of being swamped by COVID-19 at the moment.
Secondly, you will not perhaps be surprised to hear that there has been some serious happiness in the Murray household today. This subject is best tackled stone cold sober.
It is tonight worth reflecting that people seeking to still cast aspersions are attacking the jury, who were diligent and contained nine women whom they are disparaging. Nine women on a jury drawn from No voting Edinburgh. A jury who for the last few years have been, like everybody else, indoctrinated with the rubric that it is a terrible moral wrong to doubt the word of an accuser making any sexual allegation #Ibelieveher.
I was worried that this was James Stewart of the Glen before a jury of Campbells all over again, but this jury looked carefully at the actual evidence before them, evidence that was – and still is now post verdict – in no way reflected fairly in the highly selective coverage of the mainstream media. That jury came to the only decision available to honest and sensible people.
But I want to make one thing quite clear. This is not a case where the major accusations failed because of the difficulty of proving what happened with two people alone in a room. In such cases it is often right to feel real and profound sorrow for the accuser with no means of proof. This was a case where there was very real evidence, from third party after third party, of certain accusers telling definite and deliberate lies. A case where eye witnesses stated categorically that claimed events did not happen. A case where eye witnesses testified people were not physically present when claimed. A case where witnesses testified that reports had not been made, and policies not instituted, as claimed by the prosecution.
A limited amount of evidence was also heard of some of the accusers conspiring together with others, including through a Whatsapp group created for the specific purpose, to fabricate and forward those lies. The vast bulk of evidence on this specific issue of conspiracy was excluded by the court both in pre-trial hearings and by dismissal of witnesses or evidence in the trial itself but, as Alex Salmond indicated from the court steps, will be out in due time.
It is also important to note that two thirds of the accusers – and indeed precisely those two thirds who were involved in lies, fabrications and conspiracy – were and are senior members of the SNP, very much part of the party machine, very much close to the leadership and especially involved in the non-independence related agenda that has taken over the party. With one exception, they are in highly paid party nominated jobs now with the tab picked up by the taxpayer. What we learned in the trial about careerism and self-promotion among those earning a very fat living out of the party’s current domination of Scottish politics was really very unedifying indeed.
That a party which has such a wonderful and committed membership – a membership who make me proud to be a member alongside them – should play host to a parasitic and highly paid professional elite with no discernible interest in Independence is a truly remarkable phenomenon. What we saw revealed in court was a procession of members of the political class who would just have happily have made their careers in the old corrupt Scottish Labour Party if it was still in charge. A major, major clearout is needed.
Now where did I leave my Lagavulin? For once, I feel I have deserved it.
This article is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation, and I very much hope people will do so actively. Truth shall set us free.
——————————————
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:
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.
Thank goodness for the fair and even reporting of the facts of the Alex Salmond Court Case by Craig Murray, rather than relying on the skewed headlines of the Mainstream Media.
Well done Craig, but your work is not over yet. One of Murdoch’s tabloids, The Times, is reporting this morning that at least another four women have contacted the police with similar accusations against Alex,Salmond.
Its probably the same accusers. Anonymity has its advantages you know.
How convenient. But how odd that they have only now come forward, after a two year fanfare of publicity and a relentless and extensive womanhunt for ‘victims’.
They haven’t ‘just’ come forward; the reason these allegations could not be dealt with at the same time is that the acts occurred in England, and are being investigated by the Metropolitan Police. Nothing could be said about them until now so as not to prejudice the outcome of the Scottish case.
“Acts”? Try “alleged acts”.
It’s the old “there’s no smoke without fire” innuendo which damns Alex Salmond, regardless of the court’s decision.
I followed Craig’s reporting of the case and I sensed there were important exchanges about evidence while the jury was excluded and that Craig was [correctly] legally constrained in reporting those exchanges lest his reporting prejudice the trial if a juror were to read the detail of the exchanges. I hope that, now that the jury has done its work, Craig might consider if those exchanges might now be reported.
Having seen many sex assault/rape cases and woeful underreporting by women of sexual assault because of prosecution difficulties, I support the principle that alleged victims keep lifelong anonymity. However, as “Nick” or Carl Beech found, that lifelong anonymity can be lifted if there is a conviction and, having lied to police about a Westminster paedo ring, Beech is now serving 18 years for perverting the course of justice.
“I support the principle that alleged victims keep lifelong anonymity.” Yes it should be a given that all victims have the right to anonymity. But all accused should also have that right until proved guilty. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. This lack this balance opens up society to Kompromat. As things stand at the moment the accused is guilty until proved innocent.
Alex Salmond is a victim of kompromat but so are those genuine victims of sexual assault be they men or women.
It might be argued that the Moorov doctrine plus publicity should be applied to the accused. But shouldn’t the Moorov doctrine also be applied to serial accusers. What’s sauce . . .
Eoin:
“However, as “Nick” or Carl Beech found, that lifelong anonymity can be lifted if there is a conviction and, having lied to police about a Westminster paedo ring, Beech is now serving 18 years for perverting the course of justice.”
I can guarantee that nothing – absolutely nothing – will happen to those who bore false witness in the service of the state!
If I remember correctly the tweet from the journalist was specific, that the names of the four were passed by Police Scotland to the Met. The question is when did this happen, before, during or after the trial.
The acquittal of Alex Salmond is indeed a wonderful thing. It has brought genuine joy to my heart at a time when there is so much to be concerned about. Thank you for helping me be on the right side of events yet again. Without your clear information and explanations, I would most likely have damned Alex Salmoned along with the rest of the media brainwashed masses.
Very pleased to hear of Alex Salmond’s acquittal. But have one question; why is it that the names of the accusers are still not permitted to be revealed? I have not seen their names published anywhere. Is there some ongoing legal reason for this?
Yes, it’s the law. Anonymity does not end with the trial. And I’m sure if you put your mind to it you might be able to come up with good reasons for the same.
I share the happiness that Salmond has been acquitted, but do not want to see a general reversal of important protections that are intended to address a woeful conviction rate for sexual offences.
“…important protections that are intended to address a woeful conviction rate for sexual offences.”
Equality before the law, due process and an end to using alleged sex crimes as a Trojan Horse to undermine the presumption of innocence?
So how does an anti-independance faction come to be running an independance party? Whodunnit and why?
Same way as a faction of Tories took over the Labour Party. It’s much easier to prosper in politics if you don’t have any principles than if you do.
Revenge is a dish best served ice cold and very, very sober indeed Craig. Enjoy your dram and look after yourself by taking a good rest for the next few days. You have earned it and it’s a good idea in these times.
I was busy doing other stuff Last night and have only just caught up. Having followed the defence evidence and witnesses I was increasingly hoping for acquittal I just wasn’t sure it would be on all charges. I’m pretty stoked too.
I’m hoping it might bring down ‘we have to do it absolutely legally’ Sturgeon though. She is the prime imprediment to independence and needs to go. I hope Alex goes there but I’m afraid he won’t.
Craig, I am as delighted for yourself as I am for my former MP and fellow independence supporters. Your unwavering commitment to the truth has been an inspiration. However, I would like to pause for a few thoughts here;
For all the SNP’s current leadership has gone about-face on the issues you recently highlighted (not least cozying up to war criminals like Alistair Campbell, Kissinger, Clinton et al, and toeing the UK line on other issues) the cause of independence hasn’t had an ounce of reprieve from any corner of the establishment. Not one ounce. They can eulogise the Clintons or praise Israel, but if anything, the media are as hostile as ever to the party’s very reason for existence.
Those in the YES movement would do well to ponder this. No amount of compromise will ever change the fact that independence is and always will be the UK state’s de facto enemy and so appeasement will never gain us any advantage, only lead us down blind alleys as a controlled opposition.
Good news indeed. Take some time to celebrate.
Mr Salmond should take his time and take care in preparing to take action in response to all done to him, but he seems like the sort of chap to do that anyway.
Happy self isolation to all!
Many many people will have the same thoughts Craig, this was a conspiracy given the communications that had been going on between
the accusers. However, I really do not understand how accusers who cannot even supply witnesses. Was even in court, given the lack of the accuser witnesses, how could have this be allowed.
What I do not know, is who is paying the costs of the Prosecution legal fees. This was a total waste of time and money from the start.
It is my hope, and I do think Alex will, once rested, start on compiling a list of wrong doing during the trial and those who brought the case against him, and the reason’s why. Many, including myself think this was a deliberate ploy the State to neuter someone they fear, especially with the rise of the Indy polls.
The whole lot of the people involved need investigated to see where the base of all this started, and bring all the conclusions into the public domain.
Justice would appear to have been done, then.
The security services never sleep though. They have an uncanny ability to support murder, poisoning, torture, illegal coups d’etat, despotic rulers and economic looting the world over, yet somehow claim that outrage is appropriate because someone had a visit without sex to a strip joint; had sex with a human not their spouse; or, shock horror, engaged in consensual homosexual sex with someone or other.
There may be people worthy of claiming outrage over such minor misdemeanours, but if ever a group of people had excluded themselves for life from moral judgement, it is MI5, MI6 and all the secret societies they have infiltrated.
With the proviso of course that consensual homosexual sex is not even a misdemeanour….
I am delighted, even overjoyed, that Alex Salmond has been vindicated. Each time a watched the BBC reporting of the trial I would bear in mind that I had yet to read your report – even during the prosecution’s evidence when you were only able to collate others’ accounts. Can’t wait for your unexpugated version.
Politically, independence has been my goal for 55 years. We have never been closer but we need the whole SNP organisation to be focussed on that aim. If that means rooting out the careerists then that should be a priority.
Libby Brook’s take on the divisions within the SNP in the Guardian. Summary. The Salmond camp comprises pre-2014 membership, predominantly male, middle aged and older and fundamentally sexist. The Sturgeon camp is post-2014, younger, has a higher female representation and embraces bearded lesbians. Though not explicitly stated, the impression is floated that the Sturgeon camp is numerically superior.
Nice try Libby. Polling has been done on the GRA fiasco and supporters of the SNP do NOT believe in bearded lesbians. The GRA proposal is an attack on feminism. And Joanna Cherry (Sturgeon’s likely successor me thinks) is a true feminist and socially progressive.
A big THANK YOU Craig. So grateful there are worthwhile citizens like you who keep us up to date with the truth.
In what have been a heavy grim few months for me, this one bright spot has brought for the first in a long time, tears not of sadness or self-pity, but of joy. There’s nothing much more to say. All take care, there’s much to live for, much more to do.
The thing that most shocked me was woman H, who described herself as a ‘soft independence supporter’ having the temerity to put herself forward for vetting as an SNP parliamentary candidate and being furious when Salmond would not endorse her candidature.
Yes MBC
I was also astonished by that. Either a new independence party or a wholesale purge of the SNP is the way forward. The opinion polls are inching over the 50% mark. But one wonders how much more it would have been if Sturgeon had not been at the helm.
I was gobsmacked to hear that.
I expect some/many Labour voters to be ‘soft’ independence voters but not the SNP. I want my SNP candidates and employees to be dyed in the wool independence supporters.
One of the Guardian’s pieces on his acquittal goes through the prosecution’s case, without considering that the acquittal means the jury did either did not believe the witnesses or did not think the incidents amounted to a assault. (Or a mixture.) The article repeated the slur that female civil servants were not allowed to work in private with Salmond, even though – according to your account – the defence had a counter-witness who said this was not true.
I can understand the SNP not wanting to go to a referendum yet, as the numbers are still 50-50 ish. (Although this was enough for Brexit.) They really might lose again, you don’t seem to consider this. You think the leadership doesn’t actually want independence at all?
It can’t be good for the country not to have a proper opposition. Scottish Labour seems to be stuck in petty sniping and manufactured anger, when it must be in broad agreement about most things except for Independence.
It’s quite obvious to anyone with an ounce of clarity that the current SNP leadership has no intention of seeking independence. They have replaced Labour as the de facto, Scottish Establishment & seem quite comfy with their nanny state authority & generous salaries.
Alex Salmond’s return threatens this comfy status quo.
If Sturgeon was genuinely interested in independence, she has made no effort whatsoever, beyond an empty request to May & Johnson for a referendum. She could have tested a S30 in court and then bank that until the polls turned.
She didn’t even plan to have a spring conference cos that would have almost certainly demanded a debate about such matters.
This over reaction to the Covid19 virus has provided a perfect cover & a period of retreat during which she and Evans will no doubt be formulating a necessary defence strategy when the streets are open again and the shit hits the fan.
And it will.
Alex Salmond deserves his retaliatory retribution back in court and he will have plenty of financial help to achieve that. I wonder how many gender troubled, pan sexual, fringe agitants & extremists will empty their accounts to save Sturgeon & Evan’s necks?
Agreed, Sturgeon’s refusal to pursue an S30 order in Court is pathetic. To paraphrase her position, “we might be disappointed by the result.”
Fair enough, that’s me convinced. I won’t be checking my lottery numbers at the weekend ’cause I might be disappointed.
I look forward to your sober account in a couple of days , and I look forward to the hinted at revelations .
I worried that this stitch up would work , particularly with the media attempts to Weinstein it and I am so delighted that Mr Salmond is a free though exhausted man today.
Meanwhile thank you for doing the job that a functioning , honest media should have been doing – keeping us properly informed.
..and of course, you have been blessed Craig, congratulations.
Once again, thanks for all your input into the case. I think the Lagavulin was very well deserved and I just hope you will now just sit around and be good to yourself.
Delighted with the result for Alex, but angry that he had to be dragged through it. As a party member and office bearer in my branch who has committed time and resource to fighting for independence, I am gutted to now be thinking that maybe all is not what it seems. The inner circle, who knew what, who pushed it through, maybe indy lite in higher echillions is a lot to face up to and get your head round. The SNP membership must hold the party to account. I can’t see how it would work for Alex to make a major come back via SNP. I am now thinking he should head up his own organisation/movement to deliver independence. Craig hope you have recovered from the possible contempt of court nonsense and nothing further comes of it. Thank you for all you do.
I cannot imagine how anyone could make false allegations. It’s appalling and rape crisis Scotland actually thanked the complainants for appearing in court!!!
Very bemused by all the “it’s a Unionist conspiracy” comments. Unionists have no dog in this fight, and are bemused to see the Nats tearing each other to shreds. If anything, a Unionist would be hoping for an acquittal and for the next 5 years to be spent in the different factions of the SNP pursuing legal cases against each other. Perhaps even a split in the party.
It strikes me that this was (and is) a dream come true for the Brit establishment and given the access to ALL communications, cctv etc would’ve been well placed to prod the relevent people in the direction they desired. It is their job after all,
Anyone, who shouts conspiracy theory in such times is simply helping conspirators in general if not the conspirators (if they exist) in this case.
I’m glad to hear Alex got the result he justly deserves, and hope he is now enjoying some relief of no longer having this case hanging round his neck. I’m a bit puzzled though, as to just how these charges even came to be laid given the paucity of corroborative evidence, and somewhat pathetic content. That supposedly 20 detectives worked on the case is also astounding, but it could also be a measure of the quality of the Scottish Police service, an endorsement that they are prepared to take historical allegations of a sexual nature with all seriousness. Perhaps there are more women out there, more ordinary than celebrated, whose knees or hair was unwantedly touched a decade ago, now able to seek justice in the knowledge that the authorities will leave no stone unturned in pursuing their pleas for justice.
May it be that no parasitic and highly-paid professional elites will emerge unscathed, anywhere.
What is Lagavulin? Some Scots abomination?
Ten seconds on Google answers that.
Delicious!
“Lagavulin” is a string of letters from the Latin alphabet. Other examples of such strings are “you”, “are, “self-evidently”, “a bit of a” and “bellend”.
I think Lagavulin is beastly stuff; it reminds me of what turned out to be a last drink with my putative brother-in-law before he died in a PIA crash in 92. We consumed 1l of the filthy overproof duty free variant, inter alia. I personally like Dimple, but would recommend a J&B Knockando from the early 70s. I doubt you can get hold it now, but a smooth and lip-smackingly chewy and divine nectar it was.
FULL MARKS, Craig. Recharge! Wear disposable gloves when out and about (and keep disposing of them). Treat all surfaces outside your “keep” as if they were radioactive. Boost your “immune system” with pomegranate, blueberries, zinc supplements…etc… and avoid stress at all costs. Chill.
My friend in London with the flat near Sainsburys overlooking Belmarsh (where I was planning on staying during the JA hearing) has had the virus, together with his gf. Total anosmia was the unusual feature, but he was laughing and joking and fully better after less than a week.
Onwards and upwards! I’m learning the bagpipes and brushing up on my Mandarin.
No switch after “inter alia”, inter alia. Oops!
Mods to the rescue?
Dimple….mmmmm. you’ve just put me in the mood for one. Can i also recommend the Arran malt. The cheapest one in the range in like honeyed heather. Delicious.
Lagavulin, the now very rare and expensive 16yo, is my second favourite dram after the 10yo Talisker (nothing older, the fire is muted). I still have a small amount of the 16yo. It is being saved to help celebrate our Independence (and because I cannot otherwise stand to finish it on a whim). I’m also currently bereft of the Talisker and without sufficient funds to replace it. Things have reached a rather sorry pass single malt wise for me. I’m reduced to drinking an occasional dram of an ordinary cheap Jura.
No limp Speysiders for me please. I like my malts reeking of peat smoke and stinking of seaweed and redolent of the Inner Hebrides. Though I will admit the strongest Orcadian malt to the list. I’m partial to the other Orcadian as a winter apperitif if I can get hold of and afford it. I still have some of the unpeat Caol Ila for that job though. My tasting notes for that would be honeyed green melons. Though being cask strength it needs sufficient water to bring that out.
Alex Salmond’s acquittal is the best news we’ve had in a long while. Tears were brought to eyes in this household, when we saw footage of Alex talking outside court! Thanks again Craig for keeping us informed. Look forward to more information when the time’s right. Keep well.
Thank goodness there are still people like Craig about who report the truth which is distinctly absent from the mainstream media.
Here’s to continued balanced, trusty and honest journalism. Joining in a toast with a large neat Lagavulin, which is of course the best of our whiskys. Slainte
Oh… so you mean there might be such a thing as a conspiracy ? I believe the word comes from a Latin word meaning “breath together”.
I am shocked… shocked that such a thing would happen.
but not really.
My very best and warm wishes to you, your friend and family.
A welcome decision, a joyful surprise. It has been a pessimistic process. Many of us were not expecting justice to be done. This result goes against the pattern set by the recent Weinstein and Assange trials It’s understandable why the British establishment would want to take Salmond down, but not why the SNP would. I kept having to ask myself if the British establishment was indeed behind this but in such a way as to make the SNP look responsible. Has the SNP been infiltrated by saboteurs? Or why would a cabal of soft independence ‘IDPOL’ careerists risk those very careers in such a reckless conspiracy? We look forward to learning the privy facts.
Unionism froths for now but even in the wake of a not guilty verdict the SNP and the whole movement risk being badly damaged by the effects of the skunk spray.
Thanks to Craig Murray for the illuminating round-ups. While Sarah Smith et al report on an acquittal as if they were prosecution barristers, we are left hungry for more of the truth.
Why would “careerists risk those very careers in such a reckless conspiracy?
I think Craig has answered this (to some extent). The allegations were never intended to fall into the hands of Polis Scotland. The allegations were to be held in a file in SNP headquarters, to be used only if Salmond attempted a comeback. The stories were shoddily flung together with repeated use of curious wording among the conspirators because they weren’t supposed to be forensically dissected in a Court of Law. The existence of the conspiracy in the form of the Whatsapp group was only uncovered by the Polis when the conspirators phones were examined (I don’t know how Craig is sure of this aspect). When the Polis uncovered the internal SNP allegations, the conspirators were compelled to stand by them or face possible repercussions.
In short, the conspirators were too clever by half.
Genius has its limitations, stupidity is not thus encumbered.
Thanks for taking the trouble to answer my question.
However, is it really the case that ‘The allegations were never intended to fall into the hands of Police Scotland. The allegations were to be held in a file in SNP headquarters, to be used only if Salmond attempted a comeback.’?
Back in late 2017 the simultaneous drafting of the Former Ministers’ Code (allowing for historic complaints against former Scottish minsters) and the Leslie Evans/Judith McKinnon grooming of the initial two complainants against Salmond are proof of the orchestration of a plot to destroy Salmond – without his having announced any intention to return to full time politics.
It seems like Leslie Evans was risking her career. But if she was acting under Westminster-MI5 directives, perhaps she might feel secure of fresh job offers in the future.
P.S. And Mackinnon (excuse my misspelling above) had been an employee of Police Scotland before becoming an employee of the Scottish Government in 2017.
Niall McDevitt
Yes McKinnons role in this matter should not be forgotten as much as she would like it to be.