Cycling UK Forum

BBC Scotland update

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-47001028

Tinnishill wrote:BBC Scotland update

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-47001028

Salmond attended a Solemn Procedure, behind closed doors for his first Court appearance. From here on in it will be very public. He'll be tried in the High Court, as this is the only arena which can pass sentences of 5 years plus, below that it would be a proceeding under a Sheriff.

Personally from having followed the trial of Tommy Sheridan (who went to school with my elder brother), the erstwhile MSP (who served a 3 year sentence for perjury) I very much doubt a fair trial will be possible. Some reporting restrictions remain in place in Scotland, but not in the rest of the UK and the world. IMO he'll be tried and sentenced in the national press and online long before the trial begins.

He should count himself very fortunate he's not on remand (as yet) for crimes of this nature, otherwise it could be a very difficult and challenging 9 months ahead behind bars.

I see no reason why Salmond should not get a fair trial. His public persona is likeable, so he will not be battling against a preconceived negative image. I doubt anyone is gunning for him. If I were in a jury I would be listening to the evidence presented to me. And we do have to have a trial if the evidence of wrongdoing is there.

pwa wrote:I see no reason why Salmond should not get a fair trial. His public persona is likeable, so he will not be battling against a preconceived negative image. I doubt anyone is gunning for him. If I were in a jury I would be listening to the evidence presented to me. And we do have to have a trial if the evidence of wrongdoing is there.

I applaud your optimism but the record of our criminal trials here is not without its blemishes. The trial of hundreds of Scottish miners charged and sentenced during the Miners' strike is more than questionable and there is still pressure for an inquiry regarding this.

Much as I would like to reject the speculation of the existence of conspiracies involved in our politics, it's perhaps as well to consider the case of the "suicide" of Willie MacRae, an SNP activist and anti-nuclear protester who was found on a lonely Highland road with a bullet in his temple. At least that was the official verdict....but the nurse who attended him has now popped up.

"She disputed the finding that the bullet wound was in his right temple, and insisted it was at the back of his neck. Such a position would suggest he could not have committed suicide and had been shot by someone else, she has maintained."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17096 ... -was-shot/

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:I see no reason why Salmond should not get a fair trial. His public persona is likeable, so he will not be battling against a preconceived negative image. I doubt anyone is gunning for him. If I were in a jury I would be listening to the evidence presented to me. And we do have to have a trial if the evidence of wrongdoing is there.

I applaud your optimism but the record of our criminal trials here is not without its blemishes. The trial of hundreds of Scottish miners charged and sentenced during the Miners' strike is more than questionable and there is still pressure for an inquiry regarding this.

Much as I would like to reject the speculation of the existence of conspiracies involved in our politics, it's perhaps as well to consider the case of the "suicide" of Willie MacRae, an SNP activist and anti-nuclear protester who was found on a lonely Highland road with a bullet in his temple. At least that was the official verdict....but the nurse who attended him has now popped up.

"She disputed the finding that the bullet wound was in his right temple, and insisted it was at the back of his neck. Such a position would suggest he could not have committed suicide and had been shot by someone else, she has maintained."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17096 ... -was-shot/

The Miners' Strike was a long time ago and I hope a lot of things that happened then could not happen today. I do use the word "hope".

I doubt very much that Salmond is being fitted up. To suggest that would be to suggest that the complainants are liars, and surely we cannot start off with that sort of assertion when sexual abuse is being investigated. Not unless we go by the name of Trump.

pwa wrote:I see no reason why Salmond should not get a fair trial. His public persona is likeable, so he will not be battling against a preconceived negative image. I doubt anyone is gunning for him. If I were in a jury I would be listening to the evidence presented to me. And we do have to have a trial if the evidence of wrongdoing is there.

I too would like to have some faith in the above, but having witnessed the Tommy Sheridan case up close (he too was a charismatic, well known and likable public figure), the Scottish Press had him hung drawn and quartered months before he got to trial. Many documents were surreptitiously leaked (with no traceable source) and it didn't help that one Redtop ( guess who) had a stack of compromising photos of him and his wife 'six feet tall', which again 'somehow' censored versions found their way into the public domain before the trial. My brother kept quite close contact with Tommy throughout, and said that some of his key defence witnesses (some were former girlfriends) had been forced to leave the country, some as far as Australia to escape the absolute door stepping invasion they got from the Scottish press when their identity was released.

From that experience and the way the trial subsequently played out, I'm not certain that there is not something rotten at the heart of Scottish justice and the press, and that in fact there might be regular collusion between the two. AFAIK Tommy is still trying to quash the conviction, and get some justice. He has had some success (see below) I could not hand on heart, having seen the prosecution unfold in the High Court neither say that politics and the legal proceedings of the courts in Scotland are entirely separate.

I do think perhaps someone is gunning for Salmond, and I hope for his sake he's entirely innocent as charged. I am not as yet doubting the veracity of the complainants, but he wouldn't be the first political person to be taken down in a sex case, Julian Assange is suffering the same fate, even after all the Swedish rape charges have been unanimously dropped. The timing to me, after a few days reflection does seem too coincidental to be true. Like I said at first I wasn't much fussed by this case, but I have changed my opinion.

https://www.scottishlegal.com/article/t ... defamation

pwa wrote:

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:I see no reason why Salmond should not get a fair trial. His public persona is likeable, so he will not be battling against a preconceived negative image. I doubt anyone is gunning for him. If I were in a jury I would be listening to the evidence presented to me. And we do have to have a trial if the evidence of wrongdoing is there.

I applaud your optimism but the record of our criminal trials here is not without its blemishes. The trial of hundreds of Scottish miners charged and sentenced during the Miners' strike is more than questionable and there is still pressure for an inquiry regarding this.

Much as I would like to reject the speculation of the existence of conspiracies involved in our politics, it's perhaps as well to consider the case of the "suicide" of Willie MacRae, an SNP activist and anti-nuclear protester who was found on a lonely Highland road with a bullet in his temple. At least that was the official verdict....but the nurse who attended him has now popped up.

"She disputed the finding that the bullet wound was in his right temple, and insisted it was at the back of his neck. Such a position would suggest he could not have committed suicide and had been shot by someone else, she has maintained."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17096 ... -was-shot/

The Miners' Strike was a long time ago and I hope a lot of things that happened then could not happen today. I do use the word "hope".

I doubt very much that Salmond is being fitted up. To suggest that would be to suggest that the complainants are liars, and surely we cannot start off with that sort of assertion when sexual abuse is being investigated. Not unless we go by the name of Trump.

I'm perfectly sure you're correct....dear me yes...and I daresay that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi thought the same thing when jailed by a trial that besmirched the face of Scottish justice.

Let me be clear.....I think it the public duty of all citizens to be extremely cynical towards all politicians of whatever stripe. They are human and with human fallibilities, but these fallibilities are more pronounced when politicians possess a degree of power.
I know nothing of the complainants and would not seek to comment on them....however I do know something of what happens when someone is regarded by those in power as being a threat to the interests of the State. We have the example of MI6 planting the damning letter (forged) documenting Galloway's involvement in the illicit trading of oil and we have the Lockerbie case. We also have the protection of Cyril Smith and his involvement in the sexual abuse of children which was deliberately hidden away for years by important people with the help of MI5. Forgive me if I lack your confidence in our justice system or in the probity of our Government.

What timing for his arrest and charging would not have raised your suspicions about timing? Why is this week more suspicious than a month ago or six months ago? I think we have to let the law take its course and only object if and when we see malpractice.

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:

georgew wrote:

I applaud your optimism but the record of our criminal trials here is not without its blemishes. The trial of hundreds of Scottish miners charged and sentenced during the Miners' strike is more than questionable and there is still pressure for an inquiry regarding this.

Much as I would like to reject the speculation of the existence of conspiracies involved in our politics, it's perhaps as well to consider the case of the "suicide" of Willie MacRae, an SNP activist and anti-nuclear protester who was found on a lonely Highland road with a bullet in his temple. At least that was the official verdict....but the nurse who attended him has now popped up.

"She disputed the finding that the bullet wound was in his right temple, and insisted it was at the back of his neck. Such a position would suggest he could not have committed suicide and had been shot by someone else, she has maintained."
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17096 ... -was-shot/

The Miners' Strike was a long time ago and I hope a lot of things that happened then could not happen today. I do use the word "hope".

I doubt very much that Salmond is being fitted up. To suggest that would be to suggest that the complainants are liars, and surely we cannot start off with that sort of assertion when sexual abuse is being investigated. Not unless we go by the name of Trump.

I'm perfectly sure you're correct....dear me yes...and I daresay that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi thought the same thing when jailed by a trial that besmirched the face of Scottish justice.

Let me be clear.....I think it the public duty of all citizens to be extremely cynical towards all politicians of whatever stripe. They are human and with human fallibilities, but these fallibilities are more pronounced when politicians possess a degree of power.
I know nothing of the complainants and would not seek to comment on them....however I do know something of what happens when someone is regarded by those in power as being a threat to the interests of the State. We have the example of MI6 planting the damning letter (forged) documenting Galloway's involvement in the illicit trading of oil and we have the Lockerbie case. We also have the protection of Cyril Smith and his involvement in the sexual abuse of children which was deliberately hidden away for years by important people with the help of MI5. Forgive me if I lack your confidence in our justice system or in the probity of our Government.

And what if Salmond is our current Cyril Smith, but in an environment where being prominent is no longer a protection? I'm not saying that is the case, because I don't know, but it is possible. We need a trial.

pwa wrote:What timing for his arrest and charging would not have raised your suspicions about timing? Why is this week more suspicious than a month ago or six months ago? I think we have to let the law take its course and only object if and when we see malpractice.

It is now that pressure is building in Scotland for a second Independence referendum and while Salmond is not now a member of the Scottish Government he remains an influential figure in Scotland. These complaints have lain for five years without action being taken and it is quite apposite that the question "Why now? should be raised.

pwa wrote:

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:
The Miners' Strike was a long time ago and I hope a lot of things that happened then could not happen today. I do use the word "hope".

I doubt very much that Salmond is being fitted up. To suggest that would be to suggest that the complainants are liars, and surely we cannot start off with that sort of assertion when sexual abuse is being investigated. Not unless we go by the name of Trump.

I'm perfectly sure you're correct....dear me yes...and I daresay that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi thought the same thing when jailed by a trial that besmirched the face of Scottish justice.

Let me be clear.....I think it the public duty of all citizens to be extremely cynical towards all politicians of whatever stripe. They are human and with human fallibilities, but these fallibilities are more pronounced when politicians possess a degree of power.
I know nothing of the complainants and would not seek to comment on them....however I do know something of what happens when someone is regarded by those in power as being a threat to the interests of the State. We have the example of MI6 planting the damning letter (forged) documenting Galloway's involvement in the illicit trading of oil and we have the Lockerbie case. We also have the protection of Cyril Smith and his involvement in the sexual abuse of children which was deliberately hidden away for years by important people with the help of MI5. Forgive me if I lack your confidence in our justice system or in the probity of our Government.

And what if Salmond is our current Cyril Smith, but in an environment where being prominent is no longer a protection? I'm not saying that is the case, because I don't know, but it is possible. We need a trial.

Tell me..... exactly who is the person arguing against one?

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:What timing for his arrest and charging would not have raised your suspicions about timing? Why is this week more suspicious than a month ago or six months ago? I think we have to let the law take its course and only object if and when we see malpractice.

It is now that pressure is building in Scotland for a second Independence referendum and while Salmond is not now a member of the Scottish Government he remains an influential figure in Scotland. These complaints have lain for five years without action being taken and it is quite apposite that the question "Why now? should be raised.

That was all true in 2016. You could have made the same claim if he had been charged then, or any time in between. How long do you think this should be shelved for?

pwa wrote:

georgew wrote:

pwa wrote:What timing for his arrest and charging would not have raised your suspicions about timing? Why is this week more suspicious than a month ago or six months ago? I think we have to let the law take its course and only object if and when we see malpractice.

It is now that pressure is building in Scotland for a second Independence referendum and while Salmond is not now a member of the Scottish Government he remains an influential figure in Scotland. These complaints have lain for five years without action being taken and it is quite apposite that the question "Why now? should be raised.

That was all true in 2016. You could have made the same claim if he had been charged then, or any time in between. How long do you think this should be shelved for?

Perhaps you could remind me when I suggested this?

pwa wrote:That was all true in 2016. You could have made the same claim if he had been charged then, or any time in between. How long do you think this should be shelved for?

The FM of Scotland is expected to make an anouncement about the next Independent referendum in a few weeks, so as I said....."It is now that pressure is building in Scotland for a second Independence referendum and while Salmond is not now a member of the Scottish Government he remains an influential figure in Scotland. These complaints have lain for five years without action being taken and it is quite apposite that the question "Why now? should be raised."[/quote]

If these complaints against Salmond date from five years ago, that puts it pretty close to the time when he was First Minister. He is now less prominent than he was then. Charging him five years ago would have been a bigger blow for the SNP's campaign for an independence vote. If the aim had been to undermine the SNP or independence it would have been done then, when pressure was very much building for the first independence vote.