My Defence Fund has now reached over £75,000 from almost 5,000 donors. I am extremely grateful to each and every one. Work is now proceeding apace with the legal team. If charges are brought against any of the others who have been threatened by Police Scotland or the Crown Office over this case, including the journalist whose laptops and phones were seized by police, the funds will be made available to their defence also.
Original Post (from 24 April, with further update below).
I know of four pro-Independence folk who were last week phoned or visited by Police Scotland and threatened with contempt of court proceedings over social media postings they had made weeks back on the Alex Salmond case. Then on Monday, a Scottish journalist I know had his home raided by five policemen, who confiscated (and still have) all his computers and phones. They said they were from the “Alex Salmond team” and investigating his postings on the Alex Salmond case. He has not to date been charged, and his lawyer is advising him at present to say nothing, so I am not revealing his name.
Then on Tuesday morning, a large Police van full of police pulled up onto the pavement right outside my front gate, actually while I was talking on the phone to a senior political figure about the raid on my friend. The police just sat in the van staring at my house. I contacted my lawyers who contacted the Crown Office. The police van pulled away and my lawyers contacted me back to say that the Crown Office had told them I would be charged, or officially “cited”, with Contempt of Court, but they agreed there was no need for a search of my home or to remove my devices, or for vans full of police.
On Thursday two plain clothes police arrived and handed me the indictment. Shortly thereafter, an email arrived from The Times newspaper, saying that the Crown Office had “confirmed” that I had been charged with contempt of court. In the case of my friend whose house was raided, he was contacted by the Daily Record just before the raid even happened!
I am charged with contempt of court and the hearing is on 7 July at the High Court in Edinburgh. The contempt charge falls in two categories:
i) Material published before the trial liable to prejudice a jury
ii) Material published which could assist “jigsaw identification” of the failed accusers.
Plainly neither of these is the true motive of the Crown Office. If they believed that material I published was likely to have prejudiced the jury, then they had an obvious public duty to take action BEFORE the trial – and the indictment shows conclusively they were monitoring my material long before the trial. To leave this action until after the trial which they claim the material was prejudicing, would be a serious act of negligence on their part. It is quite extraordinary to prosecute for it now and not before the trial.
As for identifying the failed conspirators, I have done less than the mainstream media. But plainly the Crown Office, or whoever is pushing them to this persecution, had no genuine interest in protecting the identities, otherwise why did they tip off the media that I was being charged, and thus guarantee further publicity? If protecting the identities was their motive, to tip off the media would obviously be counterproductive.
But what proves that the Crown Office is acting from base motives and not those stated is the one-sided nature of this. Only supporters of Alex Salmond – the Alex Salmond found innocent by the jury – are being pursued by this continuing Police Scotland operation.
There are literally thousands who put out “Salmond is guilty” “Salmond is a rapist” “Salmond is a pervert” posts on social media before and during the trial. Not one has had the police knock on the door. The Herald published absolutely deliberately, the day before the trial, a montage of Alex Salmond amongst photos of mass murderers. They have not been charged. Every newspaper published “jigsaw identification” information which I withheld. They have not been charged or investigated, despite the evidence brilliantly compiled and presented to the Police.
No, this is a blatant, one-sided political persecution. That much is entirely plain. I have therefore decided, in the interests of open justice, to publish the entire indictment against me (with a single sentence redacted where I think the prosecution were excessively indiscreet). Neither the indictment nor the covering letter is marked confidential or not for publication. It is, so far as I know, a public document.
The Crown have very deliberately not included the names of any of the failed conspirators in the indictment and instead refer to the women by their court allocated letters. That is a plain indication to me that this is a public document drafted specifically with publication in mind. Otherwise the document would have more naturally used the names and not the alphabet letters.
More fundamentally this indictment is the basis on which they are attempting to put me in prison – in fact the indictment specifies up to two years in jail and an unlimited fine as the punishment sought from the court. I think the public interest, and my own interest, in it being public is very substantial.
The state believes it has finally discovered a way to put me in prison without the inconvenient hurdle of a jury of my peers. Contempt of Court is just decided by a judge. It is extraordinary that you can go to jail for a substantial two years with no jury protection and no test of “beyond reasonable doubt”; and on the whim of a judge defending what he may view as the dignity of his own office. This really is the epitome of bad law. To use it against freedom of speech is disgusting.
So here is the full indictment against me:
redactedcaseagainstcraigmurray (1)
If the indictment contains anything they did not wish to be public, well, I didn’t force them to serve it on me. From my side, the proceedings against me will be entirely open. I will remind you that you may find all or part of the indictment initially convincing; but you are yet to see my point by point reply, which naturally I shall also publish in due course.
[UPDATE
Pending the outcome of the trial, and on legal advice, I have redacted from the indictment those sentences complained of as aiding identification of a witness, and have redacted same sentences from original blog posts. My position is firmly that they absolutely do not they do not contribute to likely identification of witnesses, and the mainstream media did that to a far greater degree than I.]
The purpose of this operation against free speech is a desperate attempt to keep the lid on the nature of the state conspiracy to fit up Alex Salmond. Once the parliamentary inquiry starts, a huge amount of evidence of conspiracy which the court did not allow the defence to introduce in evidence during the criminal trial, will be released. The persecution of myself is an attempt to intimidate independent figures into not publishing anything about it. The lickspittle media of course do not have to be intimidated. To this end, I am charged specifically with saying that the Alex Salmond case was a fit-up and a conspiracy in which the Crown Office was implicated. So I thought I would say it again now:
The Alex Salmond case was a fit-up and a conspiracy in which the Crown Office was implicated, foiled by the jury. If Scotland is the kind of country where you go to jail for saying that, let me get my toothbrush.
Before then, I am afraid we have to fund my defence and I shall be very grateful for donations to my defence fund. My initial target is £60,000. I shall post daily updates on total reached, but I shall be using my established funding channels and not involving a crowdfunding website. I do not intend to fight this battle entirely on the defensive, and some of the funding may be put to launching actions against the Crown or others.
Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above
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
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Thanks for the reminder. As a layman, it’s not easy to see what’s what. So looking forward to the forensic analysis so I can learn. (The big difference between so much on the internet and your blogs is the quality of information and the corresponding contribution to an understanding of current affairs.)
“I will remind you that you may find all or part of the indictment initially convincing; but you are yet to see my point by point reply, which naturally I shall also publish in due course.“
The reported comments about the Police being from the ‘ Alex Salmond ‘ team brings into sharp focus what we have all suspected all along.
What we are seeing here is that Police Scotland have a ‘ Political Suppression Unit ‘ specifically dedicated to pursuing individuals who are considered a risk to the state. Who controls them, to whom do they account, is a question that we can ask but to which we will not get an answer.
It all comes straight out of the Brigadier General Sir Frank Kitson military strategies for retaining control of countries and colonies whereby every apparatus of government is deployed up to full scale symmetrical conflict, if all else fails.
Watching, listening, infiltrating at every level of society, controlling propaganda, or where none to be controlled making one’s own, using the court structures to take out adversaries, it’s all there – and this police unit is just the now visible aspect of these strategies.
Alex Salmond, Craig Murray, a Scottish Indy journalist, four online bloggers, the policy is there to see. And of course there was the arrest of the Wings man in Bath a year or so ago on trumped up online abuse allegation, the cancelled a Twitter accounts, and the hostile MSM.
But the mask of hidden manipulation is slipping. The Union is under greater threat now than it was in 2014. And that is why we are seeing these overt police – crown prosecution attacks on influential independence supporters.
We truly need to cherish those who are now under attack, as surely as the ajews were under attack from the Nazis in the 1930s.
It has occurred to me that Craig my not be the target in all this.
The information that Alex Salmond holds and proposes to reveal later might be the real issue. Now if Craig is being brought to court on charges perhaps that information can not be released because it may influence the court or whatever legaleese they use. Craig is dragged through an unfair and unwarranted court case in order to delay Alex Salmond’s revelations.
If this is the case then it is despicable behavior.
That’s what the state is for.
There is more than a whiff in the air of a new Independence list party – more monitoring/disinformation work for the spook patrol.
Always good to get your retaliation in first.
Yes, I think this is part of the continuing vendetta against Alex. Considering how the unionist media behaved throughout the entire trial process – without any accusations of possibly influencing the outcome of the trial, and no Contempt of Court charges – the bias is transparent. I also suspect that there’s now an attempt to suggest that Alex’s acquittal was due to Craig. It is pathetic.
This is the the first time I’ve contributed to an online appeal for funding. I’m not an SNP member of supporter, but fundamental issues are at stake here. Thought experiment: suppose just for a minute everything Craig writes is true. Or imagine that some day some time it does happen that people at the top of government conspire to take down a potential political rival by enlisting willing police and prosecutors in a conspiracy to fit him up for rape. And that we, but not many, know about it. Wouldn’t we have a duty to our country and our children to speak out? Wouldn’t that duty trump any law designed to keep us quiet? These issues need addressing openly, not hidden away. Thank you, Craig, for your courage and your eloquence. Your work is important and appreciated.
Hugh, absolutely well said. I don’t think there is enough standing up to this corrupt regime tbh
They have already used very much the same methods with Julian Assange. Reflect: if he had not been unjustly and falsely accused of rape in Sweden (although no charges were ever preferred against him), Assange would not now be in Belmarsh Prison facing extradition to almost certain death in the USA.
False rape accusations are despicable; but to the powers that be they are an invaluable tool.
I think Salmond was the test case for how well using sexual offences would work as a way to silence threats, judging by the result, not very well, they’ve also created a legal precedent so it’s generally an incompetent balls up. Very blairite in that regard
“several senior lawyers likewise”
Murph, if nothing else you will always find employ as a deep poet of the language.
You will write the last fortune cookie in Scotland,
Donation duly made. I’m one of those who read your journalism but don’t contribute financially – a taker not a giver so to speak!
But this is bigger than consuming free journalism, this is fighting for justice and truth. I hope others like me who read your works but don’t contribute financially (I’m sure the amount of man hours alone you do on research probably means you’re working for minimum wage); at least find it in themselves to contribute to your defence fund.
Journalism is akin to estate agents these days. If we allow one of the few who are credible, truthful, well researched and not in the pockets of the establishment to be taken down like this (and let’s be honest this is a blatant ‘take down’), then we deserve the ‘pile of mince’ (to coin a phrase) journalism that we are fed via print and TV.
I know times are tough but every penny helps.
Justice is always fought for but never given. We will keep up the fight until JUSTICE prevails. I will spend the rest of my life trying to regain the freedom of speech and lifestyle I once had in Scotland.
Tinme for another update Craig. Surely it’s over 50k by now…
Just paid £50 towards your Legal Fund.
I have made a donation.
I would urge others to donate too, if you can afford to. Please donate regardless of whether or not you live in Scotland, and if you do live here then regardless of whether you favour independence or the union. This is about supporting a man who has sought to oppose the doings of an exceptionally corrupt and arrogant administration which is seeking to have him jailed. (If you want a measure of the character of the Sturgeon administration, consider that it recently tried to abolish jury trial. It’s as if they think they can get away with anything. Let’s show them where the buck stops.)
Don’t know if anyone else has raised this:
There is a paragraph at the very end of the indictment, after Paragraph number 75 which begins with the words:
“MAY IT THEREFORE PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS…..”
Within this request there is a passage which reads:
“…..and to ordain him and all parties claiming interest therein and to lodge Answers hereto…..” etc. etc.
Does this or could this mean that any person/party who has actively more widely shared or distributed any of the alleged offending articles and any statements contained therein with other parties, either by email, blog quotes, reprinted/republished on individual blogs, or social media posts etc etc are also liable/potentially liable for the same offence and should present themselves to the Court at the same hearing?
And if so will there be sufficient room for all the Spartacus’s?
That would include the Wayback Machine.
Example:
https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/01/yes-minister-fan-fiction/
Cat’s out of the blog. 😉
There’s an insidious pattern here. Alex’s trial has grew Lovecraftian tentacles, ensnaring people completely outwith the original trial. Anybody whose defended Salmond because of this trial has also been attacked. His lawyer, and now Murray. There’s a pattern. The trial has somehow grew outwith the original charge. This pattern shows how the law is being weaponized and politicised. The proofs in the pudding. Guys who are reading this – these people are in power – this is beyond politics now – these people are dangerous. It’s the forces of darkness we’re seeing at work folks.
Yes, it’s very clear. Every effort is being made by the British State and its lackey the Scottish Government, to muzzle everyone involved in supporting Alex Salmond, and trying to shut down Alex achieving justice for himself.
I read through the case document and laughed when they have included the lines from the Yes Minister clips from the 80’s. I enjoyed watching these clips when you posted them on your blog.
What a sorry state we are in when the state decides to quash what is sees is dissent like this.
I hope this brings this episode to a wider audience, and more see through the main stream media portrayal of this.
We are all moving further to a place where those in power feel they can do what they want and no one will hold them to account.
I sent a modest amount to your fund.
Stephen C
Naturally I did not watch the Yes Minister clips because without a TV licence that night have been illegal.
Well I only watched about 20. Does that count?
The establishment must not be allowed to continue with their attack on democracy. People own the government. We have the right to repair our government by replacing it with a government that works for us and not for the corrupt finance it attracts.
Yes absolutely. It’s not only our right, it’s the only sensible thing to do. It’s our duty. Government is a tool for us, a help to run society, and nothing else.
I have only recently started reading your blog.
When the Alex Salmond trial was on I decided to look up the charges against him. To me it seemed that presenting these charges en masse, most of which should not have come to court, smelt of a conspiracy.
I googled – ‘ is Alex Salmond having a fair trial’, yours was the only website I found that confirmed my suspicions and gave a true reflection of what was happening in court.
I’ve been addicted to your website ever since.
Good luck – I’ve donated a few Welsh pounds.
We’re regular readers and very grateful to you for your work. We’ve sent a contribution to your campaign fund and also set up a monthly direct debit (small but we’re on modest pensions). All power to you!
Tenner sent Craig , will donate more when I can
Craig, here in Holland these days we commemorated the 75th anniversary of the death of Anne Frank.
The Gestapo came for her, just like the Met Police came for Julian, just like that Police van came for you.
Am I being too dramatic?
There are at least parallels: between the state then and the state now (esp. in the UK), between the Gestapo then (after all: Geheime Staats Polizei = Secret State Police) and the Surveillance and control-state now (esp. in the UK), between resistance then and resistance now, between –in hindsight– the legitimacy of resistance then and legitimacy of resistance currently.
Though I have no attic, I hereby offer you a ‘hiding place’ in my apartment — if not actually then symbolically.
Comparisons with the second world war are not only very dramatic, they are generally based on the same sort of disinformation campaign we’re fighting today.
Searching for the truth is not bound to topics or periods.
The truth is there. There have been people like Craig before him. Persons who put the truth above anything else and who have the courage to publish their knowledge and finds.
The time for a reset of society has come.
The end of the immense falsehoods we’ve been told since birth, and the beginning of a society based on truth and positive values.
Filthum, filthum est. All historical analogies are pertinent because the state and its interests are eternal.
Presidents of Interpol: Germany: Otto Steinhäusl: 1938–1940; Reinhard Heydrich: 1940–1942; Arthur Nebe: 1942–1943; Ernst Kaltenbrunner: 1943–1945. Well, fancy that!
Having read the indictment, I think the Court ought to have been held in the Star Chamber, or maybe the Spanish Inquisition, or modern Stalinist equivalents. Why pretend that the court is being held in public when the press have been intimidated by the government not to report anything said by the Defence?
The term ‘in camera ‘ which used to mean in secret, doesn’t work any more, now that the surveillance state permanently records on camera every single little thing that is ever done or said. Since the inception of this state surveillance it has been explained to me by IT enthusiasts who work in the trade, that a phone is about as secret as an open warehouse lorru shutter door when open. I have never stooped so low as to install CCTV nor have I ever spied on anyone. If I want to walk around with an erection in my own house, I defy anybody to tell that because of modern secret cameras I am now doing that in a public space.
We all have to, so the court also must, GROW UP. It is not us, the ordinary population of our country , that has so rudely and illegally, against all common justice and religious morality, intruded into our private spaces so that we now have to regard them as non-existant. The only thing private now is what is in our heads.
The effect of this on our psychology is a matter for future research, but nobody could argue that British people have the same psychology as those who have lived under Dictatorships where spying is routine in many forms.
The British state and its corporate global instruments are the first instigators in this country of the disgusting and illegal intrusion into our privacy. We have adapted to their illegality with ever increasing cynicism about their actions and motives.For an instrument of the British state to accuse a private citizen of breach of privacy, is FUCKING CHEEK!
In the context of state espionage, routinely employed by the police, they should have to put up with the same level of scrutiny that we have to put up with. Precisely because it otherwise appears that they, and their proven false witnesses, are sheltering behind an anonymity not enjoyed by everyone else. If Craig is incarcerated or fined I will leave this country for somewhere else. They can post my pension. If they haven’t killed us all off with covid19 first.
I made a donation. The reason I did so was about justice. Not enough has been said about it and what has happened to Alex Salmond and now Craig Murray is not justice. It is so easy to see what has happened to Scotland in Tory hands with our laws and rights being eroded in such a way that we are almost powerless to do much about it. There is only one way to stop it and that is to stand up to this tyranny. While we can do something about it, I intend to help.
Good luck, Craig. I have followed your work with admiration. Have made a donation
“We recognize that it has been said repeatedly that the greatest restraint and discretion should be used by a court in dealing with issues of contempt, lest a process, the purpose of which is to prevent interference with the administration of justice, should degenerate into an oppressive or vindictive abuse of the court’s powers. In Johnson v Grant 1923 S.C. 789, it was said of contempt of Court that the offence consists in interfering with the administration of the law; in impeding and perverting the course of justice. It is not the dignity of the court which is offended, a petty and misleading view of the issues involved, it is the fundamental supremacy of the law which is challenged. In this regard, we discern no difference between the law of Scotland and that of England”…
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=a1a986a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
REMIT OF A TRIAL JUDGE OF AN ISSUE OF POSSIBLE CONTEMPT OF COURT ON THE PART OF AAMER ANWAR 2008
I suggest having a read through of this case, some interesting points
” an oppressive or vindictive abuse of the court’s powers.”
If this case is anything like the Assange case nothing that has previously been decreed by previous judges or established as court practice, will apply. Dark forces are at work ,stripping all logic or humanity out of the proceedings.
If this remit is ignored, this country is no more than a rubbish dump where children glean toxic chemicals . Our mistake was to challenge the legitimacy of UK foreign policy. Nothing more, nothing less. That happens to be imho the legitimate reason for Scottish independence. This is the issue in this case that Salmond opposed the tory interventionist destruction of Muslim countries To anyone with any sense that opposition would have been enough to give Salmond the benefit of the doubt. But as it is, he is neither an Empire2 fanatic nor a sexual predator. This stitch up has been stitched.
There is something horribly Orwellian about the state describing the pursuit of justice as contempt.
The court is in contempt of justice by curtailing freedom of speech. I hold this government in contempt of democracy for rigging the election, and I hold the Scottish Legal System in contempt for knowingly bring false accusations against an innocent .
So… not only have our taxes been used to fund the corrupt court case against Alex Salmond, but they are now being used to punish Craig Murray for being the only pro-Salmond journalist during the court case.
Hello Joan,
I agree entirely with your sympathies, but there were a few other journalists trying to tell the truth, one of whom Craig refers in his original opening paragraph above (now the third paragraph) who has had his home raided, and his personal belongings confiscated by the folks in black uniforms.
I don’t think Craig is so much pro-Salmond as pro-truth, maybe both.
Silicon Valley and its widespread corporate network has bought out the estate of the dying mainstream media and has extended its reach into language, law and reputation. Helping itself not being helpful. Solidarity(cash).
If Craig’s defence was that others published information that would easier identify the accusers.
But If I am charged with a crime pointing out that there are others who have committed a worse crime but have not been charged will hardly help. it is the one being charged they are interested in. If I am stopped for allegedly speeding and while I am being booked cars pass at twice the speed it will not help me.
The other defence would be that the accusers were not directly identified.
The Jigsaw charge is interesting. The allegation that the accusers could be identified from information supplied. But would this depend on how much work was required to identify them from Craig’s information. If I hire a private eye and ask him to identify the person could they succeed?.
The point being they could not know for certain that they had succeeded. Any more than one who blogs that they think they have identified an accuser can know they are correct.
The link to a newspaper that does identify or more closely identifies accuser is worrying.
It may not seem fair that Craig is being prosecuted for the link but the one that is link to that revealed the information is not. But life is not fair and neither is the law. It does not have to obey logic ,common sense , common decency or fair play. It only has to implement the Law as interpreted by the Judge. The view might be Craig was given warning or instructions that he did not comply with. The defence might be that these appeared to be requests rather than court orders that must be complied with.
In Law intent is considered important. So a defence of no intent to deliberately commit contempt and even effort to avoid contempt might have some chance
Craig may have to try to win in the court of public opinion.
Very interesting Brian, but what does it say about the state of affairs in Scotland, that Craig looks likes being singled out here. What does it say to the Scottish public and indeed the world, if Craig has to go before the courts to defend himself, whilst those actually complicit can carry on as normal.
The speeding allegory, was good one however, a more recent one which I’ve noticed from Police Scotland, would be why dish out Covid-19 fines to some in parks, whilst miss out others, which I’ve personally witnessed.
‘My Defence Fund now stands at £46,002’
Hey, I think that 2p was from me. Sorry it couldn’t be more but…ah just kidding. I’ve sent you a bit more than that. As a long time reader and supporter of this blog, how could I do otherwise?
As Mattie Ross said to Rooster Cogburn, ‘You’ve got true grit.’
Good luck.
Can you accept crypto like bitcoin or Ethereum?
If you are unfamiliar ask a friend.
After reading Craig’s post, bits of the indictment, and eight pages of comments (409 thoughts), this paraphrase comes to mind:
No one expects the Scottish Inquisition!
(I’m never sure if the proper term is “Scottish” or “Scots”, but in this particular paraphrase the former more closely echoes the original.”
Some might not be aware that Yes Minister ran on the radio too! Sixteen episodes of Yes Minister were re-recorded before a live audience, without canned laughter, and very successful they were too.
Just made a donation. I always thought I would be first in the queue for a Scottish passport, but I wouldn’t want to live in a country with such corrupt forces at large.