Alex Salmond - court case concluded

[Ben@Forest]

Either Ben or ST has missed out the full conversation AIUI "could be seen as a ...
which I find credible but maybe not an offence.

The ST quotes Jackson as saying; 'l don't know much about senior politicians, but he was quite an objectionable bully to work with, in a way l don't think Sturgeon is. I think he was a nasty person to work for, a nightmare to work for...

He then appears to say Salmond' could be see as a sex pest but he's not charged with that'.

[Paulatic]

Either Ben or ST has missed out the full conversation AIUI "could be seen as a ...
which I find credible but maybe not an offence.

The ST quotes Jackson as saying; 'l don't know much about senior politicians, but he was quite an objectionable bully to work with, in a way l don't think Sturgeon is. I think he was a nasty person to work for, a nightmare to work for...

He then appears to say Salmond' could be see as a sex pest but he's not charged with that'.

Yes that’s as reported elsewhere.

[Bonefishblues]

None of which is a revelation, and pretty much what his defence was

[Ben@Forest]

Any idea that this is some pro-unionist agenda, is frankly grasping at straws, any newspaper would print this about any politician if facts substantiated it.

Let me help. The video's enough.
I don't think it's damaging, particularly, except to the reputation of a QC who discusses matters in public, and who is clearly in contempt of court at one point.

It's not so much how it damages Salmond it's more that l don't think it's some attempt to smear Salmond for political motives. That denigrates the nine women for whom the charges were brought.

And anyone who sees Salmond as having no case to answer shouldn't question Johnson's or Corbyn's sexual proclivities, or indeed those of a host of previous or future politicians who may have salacious sexual lives but which don't end up in court.

[carpetcleaner]

It doesn't say much for the quality of the Scottish prosecution system when it permits so many weak cases to go to court to be dismissed by a jury.

Possible explanations are that it is politicised, incompetent or a combination of both.

[D363]

It doesn't say much for the quality of the Scottish prosecution system when it permits so many weak cases to go to court to be dismissed by a jury.

Possible explanations are that it is politicised, incompetent or a combination of both.

Is that really the full range of possibilities?

[Tinnishill]

There is some background reading which might help, or might not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moorov_v_HM_Advocate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_proven

https://headtopics.com/uk/alex-salmond- ... t-12045528




*link edited

[carpetcleaner]

It doesn't say much for the quality of the Scottish prosecution system when it permits so many weak cases to go to court to be dismissed by a jury.

Possible explanations are that it is politicised, incompetent or a combination of both.

Is that really the full range of possibilities?

Feel free to add some of your own. I didn't claim to provide the complete list.

[mercalia]

they can still sue him in the civil courts where presumably a lower degree of evidence is needed. surly they must?

[georgew]

they can still sue him in the civil courts where presumably a lower degree of evidence is needed. surly they must?

The things you say.

The opposite is true in fact. Salmond intends to pursue those responsible for these allegations in the civil and criminal court, in that they conspired against him and perverted the course of justice. He already won a case against the Scottish Government for a biased and illegal internal investigation and received £500,00 in legal costs.
That there was such a conspiracy there is no doubt. The coterie of accusers created their own Instagram account to co-ordinate their efforts and there are texts which expose this for what it was. The alleged complaints were not initially made to the Police but to the SNP's disciplinary committee, whose Chairmen texted that they would sit on these complaints until they could use them to maximum effect against Salmond.

The whole bungled farce was an attempt to prevent Salmond's return to politics and in this, it succeeded. The Procurator Fiscal should never have allowed such a flimsy case to go ahead and he has questions to answer. The fact that many prosecution witnesses were never put in the witness box by the Prosecution to be questioned by the defense, is witness to the flimsiness of the case against Salmond.

[mercalia]

they can still sue him in the civil courts where presumably a lower degree of evidence is needed. surly they must?

The things you say.

The opposite is true in fact. Salmond intends to pursue those responsible for these allegations in the civil and criminal court, in that they conspired against him and perverted the course of justice. He already won a case against the Scottish Government for a biased and illegal internal investigation and received £500,00 in legal costs.
That there was such a conspiracy there is no doubt. The coterie of accusers created their own Instagram account to co-ordinate their efforts and there are texts which expose this for what it was. The alleged complaints were not initially made to the Police but to the SNP's disciplinary committee, whose Chairmen texted that they would sit on these complaints until they could use them to maximum effect against Salmond.

The whole bungled farce was an attempt to prevent Salmond's return to politics and in this, it succeeded. The Procurator Fiscal should never have allowed such a flimsy case to go ahead and he has questions to answer. The fact that many prosecution witnesses were never put in the witness box by the Prosecution to be questioned by the defense, is witness to the flimsiness of the case against Salmond.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52078493


if what you say is true then Scottish Justice is rotten to the core, but maybe not for the reasons you give ( compare with Cyprus was it and that rape victim?)? It doesnt surprize me about Salmonds intentions. But your slant is unbelievable. You would presumably regard the #metoo as a conspiracy also.

As some one who doesnt follow scottish politics why is Salmond hated? I thought the scots loved him?

[Will]

Reported in Sunday Times today that Salmond's own QC described him as a, 'sex pest' and a 'bully'. Apparently recorded by a member of the public. Can't link because tne ST is paywalled, but lawyers must've gone through this with a fine toothcomb before printing it on the front page.

Any idea that this is some pro-unionist agenda, is frankly grasping at straws, any newspaper would print this about any politician if facts substantiated it.

Let me help. The video's enough.
I don't think it's damaging, particularly, except to the reputation of a QC who discusses matters in public, and who is clearly in contempt of court at one point.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/alex ... -jfgbkr857

"Today Mr Jackson, who is the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates and Scotland’s leading QC said he had referred himself to the legal complaints body for investigation."

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/ ... ed-2521746

Will

[ambodach]

I have been an SNP member since the 1960's and used to be fairly active in politics.
Alex Salmond was always a source of controversy but the present vendetta stinks. One of the main complainers apparently is married to a member of Westminster security services. The others I know nothing about but some were proven in court to have fabricated their testimony in that they were not where they claimed to be when allegedly assaulted.
The tabloids were absolutely gutted when a not guilty verdict was announced but cannot restrain themselves from continuing a campaign against him.
Why are allegations of serious misbehaviour by members of other parties quickly brushed under the carpet?

[Bonefishblues]

Mr Salmond has upset an awful lot of people, not all female, it would seem.

[ambodach]

Nothing new there then.