URGENT: The access code to listen live to this morning’s hearing is now published on the court website. https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/coming-to-court/public-access-to-a-virtual-hearing Last night my lawyers told me that the hearing had been moved forward to 09.45 from 10.00, but that is not reflected on the court website at the minute.
I tried to do a public service in making available to everybody key facts from the Julian Assange extradition hearing and the Alex Salmond trial, which revealed a picture very different from that portrayed in the mainstream media. I find myself wishing now I had somebody to perform the same service for me.
I am particularly constrained about what I can say in my own case. The last week has been incredibly hectic, with our reply to the Crown’s submissions (written arguments) due in last Thursday, and our responses to the Crown’s amendments in view of our responses, due in today. I previously published the indictment, called the “petition”; the written arguments are called the “submissions”. I cannot publish these at present but I think I can publish this brief extract from the Crown’s submissions, paras 48 to 50. They are slightly edited, on legal advice, to remove even the remotest possibility that the Crown might claim that in some esoteric way they could lead to the identification of witnesses [you should see the rest of the rubbish in the Crown’s submissions!], and I publish with little comment but they are followed by some not irrelevant images of publications that are not being prosecuted for potentially influencing the jury. I can think of no reason you cannot comment, but please say nothing that might in any way reference specifically anybody with a protected identity.
Extract from the Submission of the Crown:
48. … The characters talk about how they can fabricate allegations of sexual offending against a previous minister, including attempted rape, in order to destroy his reputation. The script suggests that there was never any such offending and despite a large team of police working on the investigation for months, they did not find any evidence of serious offending. The characters suggest that more women from their organisation should be found to fabricate allegations against the former minister and that the criminal investigation has been orchestrated by the minister and his or her colleagues.
49. It is respectfully submitted that there are undeniable and crucial similarities with the prosecution of Alex Salmond and his readers note this in the attached comments section (production 2). The Respondent has not explicitly named Alexander Salmond … but the Website hosts comments attached to the article which do name him in connection with the content. The tenor of the article is that Alex Salmond has been the victim of a false campaign, motivated by political gain and that all of the criminal allegations against him have been concocted by members of government in order to damage his reputation.
50. It is respectfully submitted that such commentary from the Respondent … meet the test set out in the 1981 act. These articles carry a severely prejudicial risk to the course of justice. Should any potential jurors have read these articles, there is the clear implication that the witnesses are lying and the criminal investigation is at best, flawed or at worst, corrupt. Any potential jurors exposed to such material carry the risk of being prejudiced against the witnesses prior to hearing their evidence.
My personal blog. Influenced the jury. I am facing jail for that.
Tomorrow’s (Tuesday 7 July) hearing is at 10am. It will again be a procedural one dealing with management of the case, but again I should be very grateful indeed if any of you are able to listen in and follow the process, as matters vital to the course of the case are often determined in these procedural hearings.
You will be able to access the case via the link given at the bottom of this page. https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/coming-to-court/public-access-to-a-virtual-hearing
The password for the case should be posted on that page on Tuesday morning.
Finally, again I do apologise that I am finding it very difficult to keep up regular blog posts on other subjects while this case against me is in train.
——————————————
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 by bank transfer or standing order:
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.
“Any potential jurors exposed to such material carry the risk of being prejudiced against the witnesses prior to hearing their evidence…”
See. The point is this. Any potential jurors might have been prejudiced by your material into thinking the accused was innocent. Which is a bad thing. Whereas any potential jurors might have been prejudiced by all these newspaper front pages into thinking the accused was guilty. Which is a completely different thing…
I am part of a cooperative that runs a printed newspaper and a website. We maybe able to help you, Craig. We will certainly have the courage to try. Please contact me.
I’m not sure why you’re complaining about a perfectly common feature of UK (all jurisdictions) jury trials. The alternative is US-style extensive voire dire, where you spend a lot of time kicking specific individuals out of the jury on the grounds that they can’t be impartial for some reason.
Best wishes to Craig.
Typical of the state broadcaster that they describe Craig as an ‘Alex Salmond blogger’ in their headline.
Alex Salmond blogger wants contempt hearing in court
10 June 2020
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52994999
Tabloid stuff. What’s his age got to do with it?
“It is believed his father was an Irishman” as Private Eye used to add helpfully in the olden days.
Was that when the Eye was worth a damn?
I just want to let you know how much I appreciate your blog, Craig. Clearly you know that the truth you publish makes you a target from extremely powerful adversaries yet you have continued to shine a light in dark places that others do not want lit.
Amidst all the horrors and crises affecting us all, your campaign for truth and support of Julian Assange is precious and something we can treasure.
Too many decent people are being dragged through the legal system by wealthy individuals for alleged defamation and are facing bankruptcy. It is grotesque that like you they are subjected to crippling eye-wateringly excessive costs to defend themselves.
My thoughts will be with you and I will contribute to your fund.
What Fran Heron said.
” meet the test set out in the 1981 act. These articles carry a severely prejudicial risk to the course of justice. Should any potential jurors have read these articles, there is the clear implication that the witnesses are lying and the criminal investigation is at best, flawed or at worst, corrupt.”
“Potential jurors” . During selection of jurors . I thought they asked the potential jurors if they had read or heard or had any knowledge about the case that might be prejudicial. If the potential juror answered yes then the potential juror would not be selected.
I thought once a juror is selected they were told not to read, listen, watch or discuss anything about the case.
Unless a potential juror lied in answer to the question about prior knowledge of prejudicial information or the juror disobeyed the instructions about gaining knowledge outside the court about the case. Then I do not see how the jurors could be influenced. If the juror did lie or disobey then it is the juror that would be in contempt of the court.
The most obvious example of how a juror could accidently be exposed to information about the case outside the court. Would be catching a piece on the TV or in the headline of a news paper. Visiting a web site and reading an article is not something you could do accidently. Any juror is supposed to report to the court if they have been exposed to any information outside the court. The court then decides if they should remain or be replaced by one of the reserve jurors.
As I understand it is the court that has the responsibility that its rules are obeyed. If any juror is overheard or reported for disobeying the courts instructions then again the court then decides if they should remain or be replaced by one of the reserve jurors.
Another observation about the statement
“These articles carry a severely prejudicial risk to the course of justice. Should any potential jurors have read these articles, there is the clear implication that the witnesses are lying and the criminal investigation is at best, flawed or at worst, corrupt.”
is that it is written by some idiotic bureaucrat who is clearly semi-literate and writing down whatever they think “sounds good” to support what has already been decided, probably by whoever gave them their brief. For example this idiot cannot construct a conditional sentence properly, but knows it sounds posh to use the future perfect subjunctive form “Should any potential jurors have read”. And what is the word “potential” doing there?
The judge must have instructed the jurors (actual ones, not potential ones) to pay no attention to anything they saw on the internet or in the newspapers that related to the charges laid against the defendant. That’s part of a f*cking judge’s job. If a judge thinks a trial has been prejudiced, they either remove the prejudice – perhaps ordering a retrial – or they stop the trial and throw all the charges out because if a defendant cannot be tried fairly then he is innocent.
If the a*sehole thought the trial was being prejudicially influenced, she should have said so, and heard arguments from the prosecution to that effect, and if she’d decided that that was happening she should have done something about it there and then. The criminals who run Scotland, fat with corruptly received coronavirus money, are trying to have a second bite at the cherry. They’re terrified a little bit of light is going to be shone on them. That’s why they’re trying to lock Craig up.
Moneygrabbing liars don’t half whinge! They’re also spiteful and can be vicious. This what we’re dealing with here: corruption through and through.
“Any juror is supposed to report to the court if they have been exposed to any information outside the court.”
Certainly if an attempt is made to influence a juror – a very serious offence – a juror must report it. But if they walk past a newsstand and see a headline in huge type? (And headlines and pictures have far more influence than body text.) The judge will have told them to disregard anything they hear about the case, or relating to the case, outside the court. She can remind them to that effect if some especially lurid stuff has been in the media that morning or the previous evening.
Clearly the ruling scum don’t believe Alex Salmond got the kind of trial they wanted, because it didn’t end with the result they wanted, and moreover, the way it ended puts them in danger of being exposed. That’s why they’re lashing out.
Excellent point! I can only hope others will pick this up as well
All the best Craig, sickened that you are being put through this.
I really cannot see how this prosecution can succeed. Maybe the point is judicial harrassment to distract Craig from all the other vital work he is doing and keep him perpetually on the back foot. There is also the possibility of a conviction on some very minor technical charge which will carry light consequences in terms of sentencing, but which will allow media to describe him as a ‘convicted criminal’.
“There is also the possibility of a conviction on some very minor technical charge which will carry light consequences in terms of sentencing, but which will allow media to describe him as a ‘convicted criminal’.”
That’s unlikely. And any kind of non-custodial sentence is unlikely if Craig is convicted of what’s currently on the charge sheet (i.e. contempt), even if technically such a sentence is available. But in the event that they convict him and decide they do want to hand him a non-custodial, then one possibility is a suspended sentence (known in the legal trade as a “bender”).
It turns the bosses on like nobody’s business to see a person continue at liberty but scared of putting a foot wrong and therefore restricted to saying unchallenging anodyne stuff only. (George Orwell depicted this in “1984”.) (See also the effect of largactil, or lobotomy.) The bosses like their victim being an “example” to all others who might possibly one day think of fighting the system. It also makes them associate the warm cuddle of the system from which they line their bank accounts with the realm of the reasonably possible. “He stepped out of line, but look at him now. He learnt his lesson in the end. I bet he thinks it wasn’t worth stepping off the path in the first place.”
Works the same in all countries.
This, dear readers, is capitalism – the real world. Capitalism doesn’t mean the absence of special toilets for those who suffer confusion as to whether they’re a boy or a girl.
F*** the system!
A ‘deferred sentence’ would have similar effect. Having those judges looking over your shoulder would put your gas in a peep as my gran (RIP) would have said.
A ‘deferred sentence’ would have similar effect. Having those judges looking over your shoulder would put your gas in a peep as my gran (RIP) would have said. 😉
effect all right. Chilling effect.
Is there such a thing as a suspended sentence in Scotland?
Good grief that was short.
Certainly was! Did I get the impression that the prosecution was rather taken back about the fact that Craig appears to have amassed a large number of witnesses wanting to testify for him. I assume they wanted it all done and dusted asap.
…. so what happened? I would have liked to have attended, but couldn’t.
Cannot believe this has reached trial. What are the odds any juror saw your blog post (much less understood it) compared to all those blatantly prejudicial MSM headlines? An absolute farce, clearly intended to silence one of our few truth tellers. It is so utterly brazen and shameless and that is the scariest aspect of it, along with the media silence.
Anybody else find they can’t get the access system to work? Or is the ‘court’ full?
No. Did you correct access 1373689736 and hash. Followed again by hash
At least the court technical system is ok.
Sorry Louise. When you make the Access contact with the court there is no reply to let you know you are connected. It sounds like you are disconnected. (why not music- any suggestions) Just a total blank until they start. Be very patient .
Showing the trial in “public” online but requiring pre-registration is taking the piss. Nice little earner for whichever bunch of “IT” scammers got the contract, oiled of course by some nice backhanders too – as with any state contract. Your lordships, you’re so “just”!
What do you mean, is there a video broadcast as well?
Apologies for the misphrasing. There is only audio as far as I’m aware.
Cardinal Richelieu: “Give me six lines written by the most honest man and I will find in them something to hang him.”
No connection to Catholic Cardinal Richelieu. Facts. Or others will re-quote wrongly.
But the sentiment. Of course.
To misquote Peter Cook (slightly): ‘In Scotland, justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be believed…..’
I truly have never thought in my whole life before now (born 1944), that I needed in this country to be cautious about expressing my honest opinion in public about anything: least of all, about the operations of the justice system.
I hope it helps that you know how many of us are so deeply shocked.
The video Peter Cook made after the Jeremy Thorpe trial is great to watch. Trial judges in England really do say “Members of the jury, you may think XXX” (what they want them to think), followed by “But members of the jury, that is entirely a matter for you to decide” (so that in the transcript the judge doesn’t look biased).
But seriously, Frank, you’ve never felt cautious about expressing your honest opinion in public? I’m guessing you don’t hold the opinion that we’re ruled by a bunch of thieving lying crooks, and that systems such as the “education” system, the “health” system, etc., stink to high heaven?
No, I’ve never felt cautious about saying things like this in public — though, as it happens, I never have said such a thing as that ‘….. the “health” system…… stink[s] to high heaven.’
When I have expressed myself in that kind of way, I’m sure that my hearers understood that I was speaking rhetorically. I admit that I might be cautious about speaking like this in the hearing of some types of audience. But that kind of caution is very different from the understanding that the expression of my honest opinions might be a punishable offence.
Hope Craig has manged to rub the big toe on the statue of David Hume outside the High Court. That is supposed to bring good luck!
https://www.edinburghexpert.com/blog/david-hume-edinburghs-philosopher
What happened to the Enlightenment? https://www.philosophybasics.com/philosophers_hume.html#:
John Locke said (to paraphrase) ‘Where the law ends, tyranny begins’.
The High Court – https://images.app.goo.gl/iGPA6FGcxQMHX1k19 – An intimidating looking pile.
The virtual public gallery must be full. The court is currently hearing another appeal. Nothing can therefore be reported yet.
Access is now terminated. The appellant had her sentence reduced on appeal. Mr Murray’s case was not heard.
A curious way to spend an hour!
Yes it was, but it was all over by 10.09.
Can you reveal what happened, or are you constrained by the legal restrictions?
Trial proper starts 22nd October.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/18566311.court-sets-date-craig-murray-trial-alex-salmond-case/
Coronavirus permitting I guess.
So poor Craig has this hanging over him and his family for three months. It’s wicked.
Where is Percy Bysshe Shelley when you need him?
‘Rise like Lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number-
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you
Ye are many-they are few.’
Why did the court break up at 10.09? Time for lunch??
Do barristers get paid more for the first day of any hearing?
That’s an incentive for lots of short hearings – even if there’s no actual hearing. Get those fee notes in!
We don’t have ‘barristers’ in Scotland.
I suspect advocates, or in this case a solicitor-advocate bills by the minute!
Their lifestyles indicate that they really do know how to bill. The whole system is a racket.
In England back in the day (and this may well still be the case), defence barristers appearing at criminal trials were paid more on the first day, as an incentive to “get it over and done with” (the “it” including especially the presentation of the defendant’s case), which could never of course be said openly.
The wheels of “justice” turn slowly or quickly according to how much extra money those who already have loads of money (especially those who went to boarding schools which had 10-foot thick walls) trouser out of one procedure or the other.
It is still the case (no pun intended!). Legal aid/fees go down after the first day and as the trial progresses. The first half hour is the most ‘lucrative’. Better to get a lot of cases done and dusted as quickly as possible than go for lengthy protracted trials.
So long as people thought that little sensor on the traffic lights was a camera, nobody went through a red light. Now they know it isn’t , sphere in Birmingham drivers often go through them.
The US administration which has ordered Craig to be harrassedforhis journalism about Julian Assange, maybe was unaware that procedures today might be viewed by the public online.
No doubt the same Priti Patel who tried to get British overseas aid to Al Qaida fighting in the Golan for Israel has a handy piece of new Scottish legislation to change the system to hand. People who watch court dramas on line are perverts comparable to viewers of child sex porn, who ” always work from home”. Job done. Ms Sturgeon gets her Dame for passing it through quickly. And you thought the Arts bailout yesterday was for Twanky and Ballet.
The now Home Secretary tried to get charity to pay for Israel to get the Golan.
The small camera shaped sensors are to detect traffic flow and if pedestrians are waiting or are still on the crossing. The information is fed back to the traffic light controller to enable optimal switching of the traffic lights. Another thing you may see installed on traffic lights is a small white box – 4G/5G mesh.
I wanted to attend the virtual hearing but was unaware that it was taking place today, would be great if the details of the next virtual hearing could be posted in advance along with the codes etc.
Mike
@Giyane – “Asian constituents” meaning “Asian businessmen exploiting large numbers of low-paid Asian workers”.
The relationship between Covid policy and the exploitation of low-paid “look the other way” labour is very interesting. Officials have been “looking the other way” (so long as they keep getting the bribes) regarding all sorts of working environments, including outright slave labour at, just to name one example, nail bars. Nail bars in Britain employ mainly Vietnamese slaves, but there are slaves and semi-slaves in many other sectors too – in car washes, in construction, and so on. (For any naive people reading this, yes, those African, Eastern European, and sometimes southwest Asian [*] workers who clean cars in Sainsbury’s and Tesco’s car parks are mainly slaves.) Even if the authorities were serious about enforcing “social distancing”, how are they going to do it at places that they know about but are not supposed to know anything about at all? Send someone in to wave a shooter about is one answer. In many places the veneer that covers the operation of small trades, storage units, window washing, and all sorts of “property” and “management” and “security” ventures from “innocent” eyes is paper thin. Everybody pays for protection. There’s no “glasnost”…
Then there are care homes, where so many elderly people were recently murdered, as medics and cops and public health officials all “looked the other way” or filled in crap on their forms. Care homes are criminal rackets run by property scum, mainly hoiking money out to property companies based in tax havens.
If more people knew what went on, there’d be…well let’s just say that local councils might get hit with higher insurance premiums.
Note
* Southwest Asian, or “Middle Eastern” in “orientalist” parlance.
It will be interesting to watch this play out, because the kind of “businesspeople” who own care homes, while also owning a tax haven-based property company that the care home company pays “rent” to, tend to be the type who are a pillar of the local Conservative association.
N_
A TrumBojo public service announcement will be made before the next election suspending minimum wage , safe distancing, parking fines and mandatory stopping at traffic lights in Leicester and Birmingham. We want that red wall of Trotskyist dictatorship called socialism, torn down like the Berlin Wall.
I can hear him saying it now in plummey tones, with the Home Secretary simultaneoysly translating into Eschewry English, Brummay and deaf language, using one or two fingers of her right hand.
Did you mean ‘pillock’.
As for the newbie on here (or maybe an oldie in disguise), that’s going back 40 years +.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Endell_Esquire I never watched it.
Your assertion about nail bar workers is simply not true. They are free to move, and earn well above minimum wage.
Thanks to the Sunday Times you now know about it.
Lay waste to them Craigie boy!
Sorry. I’ve only just read this. I searched high and low for a link after a comment by Iain Orr asking for one. Yesterday I was busy with an engineering project and away from the computer. Will try to catch up.
You can’t be taken into custody at a virtual hearing!
My Murray
I have to say that if your blog could influence jurors to ‘pervert the course of justice’, then what on earth are lawyers doing challenging witnesses in ways far more peremptory, far more crushing, far more derogatory than any of your articles? Influencing jury members, by any chance??
Lawyers regularly say: ‘I put it to you that no such thing occurred, and that your assertions are not in any way accurate.’
Lawyers continually use tricks to try and discredit witnesses, with the sole aim of making jurors think that they are untrustworthy, are liars, are mistaken.
I simply do not understand why it is that lawyers, who are never allowed to be cross-examined for their own lying, should be the sole people allowed to interrogate evidence. Just imagine if lawyers could be prosecuted for ‘lying in court’, when all they would claim they were doing were ‘testing the evidence through putting a witness under emotional strain in a public place’.
The whole legal system would collapse at the seams.
There seems to be some absurd assumption that lawyers are out to uncover the truth.
Lawyers are out to win and if truth is a casualty of that, then large numbers of ambitious lawyers (the ones who secure briefs for high profile trials) see that as acceptable collateral damage.
Truth seeking is apparently now a crime, whereas wilful distortion of the truth (the lawyers’ stock in trade) is principled and honorable.
What a shambles this country is becoming…..
Are we all going to be wearing a Krankie mask in the shops come Friday in Scotland. Y’ll aw dae whit yir telt!!
Aye, or ye’ll feel Nicola’s toe up the crack o’ yer ass!
Janice T – facile.
Charles Endell Esquire
July 7, 2020 at 19:17
It is still the case (no pun intended!). Legal aid/fees go down after the first day and as the trial progresses. The first half hour is the most ‘lucrative’. Better to get a lot of cases done and dusted as quickly as possible than go for lengthy protracted trials.
———————————————————————
Charles,
many years ago I knew a solicitor who had a reputation (even within the police) for taking on a lot of cases of
minor offences and persuading his clients to plead guilty. He used to rush around the magistrates courts from one case to another. I won’t name him though; he became a district judge.
Pleading guilty is what lawyers call ‘damage limitation’ 😉
Craig,
on twitter you wrote:
“My trial now fixed for 22-23 October before Lady Dorrian, Lord Glennie and Lord Turnbull. Lady Dorrian expressed surprise and scepticism that I wished to call any witnesses. There will be a prior hearing to determine what evidence I can call. No date yet. thenational.scot/news/18566311.…”
I note that you say “any witnesses”. That’s not what “The National”, to which you link, is reporting.
The National have it as
“Lady Dorrian, the second most senior judge in Scotland as Lord Justice Clark, said she was “quite surprised” at the length of the witness list provided by the accused’s representatives. She asked whether all the names provided were “relevant”.”
Could you, or anybody who actually listened in clarify?
She also expressed surprise that Mr Murray would wish to present any witnesses at all! Very strange.
Sounds like minds have been made up!
Still waiting for Craig to answer this.
And still…
In the meantime, I’m going to bet that Craig isn’t going to jail. I have a hunch he’ll be ok.
*twiddles thumbs*
It is barbarous that you are being made to endure this. I continue to support you and am happy to see your many other supporters posting on this blog.
Craig, I live in the North of Scotland and after last weeks electrical storm I am having dreadful technology issues and I am therefore unable to listen in at present. My thoughts are with you and I echo all the positive comments made here regarding your work to provide us with clarity in the murky world we live in. I remain horrified that this is happening to you.
Thank you. I can’t find the password but I can subscribe!
What is striking about the publications shown here and the extreme contrast with your own reports is the prurient sensationalist style employed by the majority of the newspapers(scotsman and national lesser in that respect) and your detailed reporting of what actually occurred in court.
Apparently we are inured to this kind of laddish innuendo and one can only speculate that over many years this style has become the norm. You drew attention to yourself by the more measured style you used for your reports, something not done by the gutter press because it wouldn’t sell. I am reminded of the work of Professor Neil Postman in his books (amusing ourselves to death etc) where he describes the decline in quality and scope of literacy over the course of the 20th century. In the early phase of mass literacy the pamphlets and publications were very demanding of high levels of verbal analysis and an extensive vocabulary and reading. Postman marks the decline in the capacity of ordinary people to analyse complex issues using dense and detailed text requiring determination and high levels of literacy and previous reading to follow. He relates this to technology such as the arrival of more instant media such as radio and television which eventually began to dominate discourse and was not susceptible to considered analysis because it was so ephemeral.
There is a degree of irony that, at least in the early stages of internet communication we have returned to a more complex medium (although that has come under renewed pressure to dumb down from such media as Instagram and twitter. For more reliable and unbiased information the more discerning reader will now turn to specialist blogs and online commentary.
It seems to me that the Scottish courts/establishment have become adapted to the facile idiocy of the press that excuses them the scrutiny that these matters rightly deserve.
What you have done is upset the applecart by providing an alternative discourse with detail and analytic elements. Heaven forfend that the operators of this closed and exclusive regime should be exposed to scrutiny. How uncomfortable for these people to be held accountable.
Please maintain yourself and keep alert, especially in relation to your current situation, and that of Julian Assange.
What you have highlighted is the execrable vacuous mentality that is cultivated by publications like the Mail, Express and Record. and the slightly less extreme version in the National and Scotsman and Guardian and exposed their corrupt relationship with authority and power.
Relevant to the thread: https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/
I have followed this blog for some years. No two people will agree on everything and there are issues with which I don’t agree with Craig. When I mentioned this to him on a Julian Assange demonstration he said “There are some things I write which I’m not sure I agree with myself,” which made me laugh. Having said that I really do believe at the moment, as this blog says, he needs a Craig Murray, He has taken up the cases of asylum-seekers as well as high-profile individuals like Alex Salmond and Julian Assange persecuted by the establishment. He has always put forward a strong case. Now it is his turn to need our help and I hope that those who have the talent to advocate on his behalf step forward.
After much soul searching I have decided to write a speculative blog-post about what might be behind Vanessa Baraitser’s torture of Julian Assange. I will post it on Julian Assange, Judge Vanessa Baraitser to keep it on topic.
I can think of no one better to advocate on Craig’s behalf than you, John. You are retired and so have the time, you have a fluent pen and you are a 105% supporter. Alec Salmond has other pressing things to do. So go for it, John!
Ian, thanks for your confidence. I wish I had it. One of the problems with retirement is you tend to take it when your more acute years have passed. As to having time – I wish. I’m engaged in an engineering project, secretary of a club, trying to finish a novel, doing a bit of cycling and playing a bit of golf, all that outside my family life. But of course I will give what help I can.
If the establishment gets all decent people into prison where they can no longer speak out against its corruption it is the end of society as we once knew it.
Did ypu pick up a few weeks ago she presided on an extradition case???? And refused it…. I think I remember…..sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander maybe
Do you have a link Jo?