The less-deserving pro-independence website

Wings Over Scotland


The law

Posted on January 08, 2014 by

Chapter 6 of “The Claim Of Scotland”.

claim6

Quote Of The Chapter:

“I know something of the law, but of Scots Law I am as ignorant as a native of Mexico; and yet I am quite as learned in it as any of your Lordships.”

An ancestor of Richard Hammond, clearly.

Print Friendly

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 08 01 14 20:03

    Scotlands Date With Destiny ¦ 18/09/2014 ¦ The law

53 to “The law”

  1. kalmar says:

    Can anyone explain the current intention to remove “corroboration” from Scots law? 
     
    I get why this would be a good thing for certain types of cases, but surely there must be a way of working around that without fundamentally altering a centuries-old system?
     
    Kenny Macaskill was trying to support the change on newsnight recently and it didn’t sound like he had much in the way of supporting arguments, and the actual judges very much against it.

    What’s going on there then?

  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Can anyone explain the current intention to remove “corroboration” from Scots law?”

    This man probably can:

    http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.com/

  3. Edward says:

    Way O/T , You may not be aware but for some bizarre reason the BBC have opened up comments on Joke McConnells ramblings
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25645859

  4. Murray McCallum says:

    I liked the observation that from 1425 the Faculty of Advocates met annually to appoint ‘Counsel for the Poor’ to legally defend those without means.
     
    This concept was finally introduced in England in 1965 (Legal Aid) – 540 years after it was introduced in Scotland.

  5. gordoz says:

    O/T – Sorry Rev posted on wrong thread
     

    Alex Rowley Labour in Scotland Cowdenbeath lies for the STV Cameras on 6pm news.
    I know SNP are pushing this but I have never said that the ‘freeze’ should be ended or ‘the council tax should be raised’.
     
    Try this then Alex  35 seconds in –
     
    http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-politics/8548-dunfermline-leaflet-threatens-labour-cowdenbeath-byelection-campaign-as-candidate-faces-questions

  6. Krackerman says:

    I see we are as well defended as usual by the Might Great British state…  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533846/Battle-stations-Navy-scrambles-destroyer-challenge-Russian-warship-British-coast-takes-24-hours-make-600-mile-journey-Portsmouth-base-Putin-testing-response-time.html

    Best quote is this Defender was fully equipped with Sea Viper surface-to-air missiles and guns capable of firing 40kg shells as far as 18 miles. Her captain and crew knew this was the real deal and were prepared to engage.’  Engage what – a Russian ship with Anti-aircraft missles??? talk about bringing a knife to a gunfight..

  7. twenty14 says:

    O/T – noticed on a previous thread someone stated that they had problems with their FB page.
    I’m having the same problem – anyone else ?

  8. ronnie anderson says:

    O/T sos Rev, Glasgow city council givieing school kid,s £10, if the join a Credit Union, good idea.Without the added statement, ( to teach them how to save responsibly ). If you  didna laugh you,d greet, Glasgow city councilor,s teaching, how to save money.Start within the council chamber,s, fekin clown,s. Day a need tae mention CONE HEID.

  9. Jingly Jangly says:

    Got my copy in the post today, a lot bigger than I imagined, how this book was off the radar for so long is a mystery (not)

  10. Luigi says:

    O/T interesting program on BBC tonight (1040): The men who own Scotland.
    Might be worth a watch.

  11. Ken500 says:

    There are Unionists miscarriages of justice, even with corroboration. Sheridan, Megrahi, the illegal London Supreme Appeal. Maybe the Scottish Law Lords could do something.

    Tommy Sheridan was refused leave to appeal to the EU Court of Human Right, by the illegal (under Scots Law) London Supreme Appeal Court. Despite ‘perjury’ alllegedly being committed at the Political Show trial, costing £5Million. Tommy Sheridan fought the illegal Poll tax and stopped warrant sales. Warrant sales especially affected the poorest. When will the conviction be quoshed and compensation be given. What about upholding social justice? In Scotland.

    There should be a public Inquiry into the helicopter crashes in the North Sea. If responsibility is not decided, the families cannot sue for full compensation. There are no corresponding (proportionate) disasters in the Norwegian Oil sector.

  12. Ken500 says:

    It’s safer with Russian vessels in Scottish waters, than Trident,

  13. Les Wilson says:

    I do’t know sometimes there is so much rubbish going around, I am glad we have Wings and the attention of REV, looking after the interests of our Country. It seems to me that the whole UK system is nearing breakdown, too much manipulation, too many lies, too many jokers fleecing the public, too much self interest,and that is only the politicians! 
     
    I will be so happy to get rid of the whole crowd of them, and of course a big bunch of our own. We all know who they are, I hope their day will come soon, not soon enough for me.

  14. Monty Carlow says:

    The thought which recurs as I read these chapters is the disbelief at the attitudes which prevailed in the 1960s, and indeed since then. 
     
    For a long time before, and right up to almost the end of the 20th century, Scotland still had no parliament to deal with its affairs, despite it having been the clear will of the people for so long.  The willingness to address these wishes has cynically ebbed and flowed with SNP support, it seems.
     
    That choice was resisted at the time of the Covenant, considered during the SNP’s rise in the 1970s, gerrymandered away at the 1979 referendum and ignored thereafter as SNP support waned, discussed again as SNP support revived from the late 1980s, and only conceded when London Labour was backed into a corner.  It was only ever a reaction to the SNP threat.
     
    But the pattern continued thereafter, in relation to demands for increased powers. Everyone was offering significant additional powers, even the Tories, as SNP support rallied around the time of their 2007 election, but as their support fell – well, in the end we got airguns and speed limits.  With the referendum on the way after the 2011 SNP majority government took office, a Yes result was the new threat, but a No result was regarded as a certain outcome, and we have had only vague promises, and no second question on the ballot paper.  As September approaches, if a Yes result seems plausible to the unionists, expect to hear frantic offers of devo-max.  Perhaps this is already starting. 
     
    Scotland mustn’t be fooled by these last gasp promises in the closing months before the vote in an attempt to fob us off.  History, in the shape of the above pattern, and in Alec Douglas-Home’s disgraceful lies on the eve of the 1979 referendum, tells us exactly what would happen after a No vote.

  15. Morag says:

    Kenny Macaskill was trying to support the change on newsnight recently and it didn’t sound like he had much in the way of supporting arguments, and the actual judges very much against it.
     
    He came over at conference as being arrogant and out of touch on the issue.  It was really, I am the boss and I want this so it will happen.
     
    I am very disappointed in Kenny.  I think he has been in that job too long, and it’s time for new blood.

  16. msean says:

    When Yes looks like it might possibly win,an offer like devo max but made to be different in some way only a committee could come up with,might be made. Different so that it will not look exactly like previous incarnations of the idea,and gives away as little as possible while dressed as a lot. Probably will appear via the usual  weekend kite flying exercises.

  17. Flower of Scotland says:

    Morag ! It’s not about Kenny Macaskill ! He is trying to improve the law to help those suffering from eg domestic abuse , when there are few witnesses ! Police Scotland want this , but of coarse the “old men ” in the law offices don’t want change as ever . You should at least understand this ! 

  18. Albamac says:

    @Rev. Stuart Campbell
     
    Just posted download links for Chapter V conversions but they got swallowed.  Akismet?

  19. Seasick Dave says:

    It was really, I am the boss and I want this so it will happen.
     
    Sounds like my wife 🙂

  20. dadsarmy says:

    @Krackerman
     
    Defender is equipped with Sea Viper yes, which is anti-air and anti-missile, and Defender is capable of tracking and targetting 2,000 targets or some stuff like that. But also with some Harpoon anti-ship and some helos also with anti-ship or anti-sub. Thing is there’s almost certainly one or two Astutes around, and apart from that Tornados at Lossiemouth with ASRAAMs, plus the Russian ship’s movements would have been tracked even before leaving port. There’s a major Russian task force exercise fairly nearby and NATO would be all over it.
     
    To be honest the fact that the “defence source” even mentioned the gun shows that he/she has even little less knowledge than I have of what actually occurred, and calling it an immediate response ship in times of national crisis is just – typical Daily Mail. Defender is currently the Fleet Ready Escort, and being in port is apparently not unusual, she could have been in Belfast for an open day. Oh – and making a big thing of the Russian ship actually having missiles, like, wow.
     
    Yes, there should be a major surface warhsip stationed up here just to show the face, and it’s probable that the Russians are, not so much testing our defences, as gathering data. Russia is awakening, if it ever went to sleep at all. Well, back to sleep for me.

  21. dadsarmy says:

    @Morag
     
    Yes, it could be that removal of corroboration, with safeguards, is the correct thing to do, the thing is far too many disagree with him. The right thing for him to do is go back to consultation, do some sweet talking rather than outright bullying,, and then come back in a year or so when there’s some sort of concensus.
     
    I’m sure I remember seeing on TV Macaskill at the SNP Conference, the NATO debate, basically bullying people and being the only one to get booed. New blood indeed is needed, unless he cops on to himself – and increasing opposition.

  22. Ken500 says:

    The removal of ‘corroboration’ which is an impediment to Justice for many victims (who have been bullied and bloodied for years) bring Scots Law into line with most countries. The Scottish Lord Law (Car? Apologies) who was tasked with the consultation, and found that ‘corroboration’ rule should be changed. There is no other comparable Legal system which has such a ‘corroboration’ rule. ‘Corroboration’ rule means many case of violence can’t not be taken to Court, affecting many victims, especially women – which is unjust, unfair and unequal. ie not in the interests of Justice. The Law is supposed to be equal for all. With modern science and modern forensic techniques, the removal of ‘corroboration’ brings Scottish Law not only into line with contemporaries but into line with the modern world.

    The Law of ‘corroboration’ was from a different world, when it helped to ensure Justice. In today’s world there is no need for ‘corroboration’ because of the advancement of (‘Scottish inspired’) modern forensic science. Modern forensic science is a replacement for unreliable ‘corroboration’ or hearsay (not permitted under Scots Law. The learned Law Lord is right ‘corroboration’ should go. In the interest of justice (and victims) in today’s world, ‘corroboration’ is an impediment to Justice for many, not an aid. The world has moved on and so must the Legal system to ensure the equal rights of victims. The ‘corroboration’ rule discriminates between victims, that is unequal, unjust and unfair, in a more advanced society. Equal rights under the Law must be upheld, and be, as always a major principle of the Law.

    Kenny McAskill is doing the right thing. There is a need for the Law to to be changed, when it becomes an impediment to justice, not an upholding principle of justice. That should be applied to other miscarriages of Justice in Scotland, which are not being investigated and resolved.

  23. Ken500 says:

    Supporters of Independence missed a trick. The Referendum should have been a UK wide vote. Cameron would have had to debated – just for fun and the sheer entertainment value. A Yes, Yes vote would have been decisive, (it will be anyway), because of the years of deceit, lies and propaganda from Westminster concerning Scottish finances and matters, The ‘chickens’ would have come home to roost. Poetic justice, and Scotland will keep the Golden egg. Consensus Independence.

  24. Ken500 says:

    Russia was part of the Alliance which protected Britain during the 11WW, and took the major hit for it. 26 millions Russian died. A much higher proportion than any other nation. Russia has a seat at the UN top table committed to an Alliance of peace and justice in the World and with NATO countries. No upheld by other major Nations, (including the UK and US) against their own guiding Principles/Laws. Might is not right.

  25. Ken500 says:

    The kids will withdraw the £10 + profit, and spend it on sweeties and the comics (computer games) at the first opportunity. C’est la vie. Kids will be kids but it will help the economy, not the taxpayers paying for it. At least the kids will be better nourished with a wee bonus. Small price to pay for business information, and a wee treat. Wee horrors.

  26. john king says:

    o/t 
    Breaking news, BBC Scotland reports today that Interested citizens (Better Together)
    have employed the services of another interested citizen (Jim Gallagher ex civil servant) whose role will be “to examine the scope for the transfer  of further powers to Holyrood in the event of a no vote in the referendum”
     
    So then what do we have? powerless Better Together  who represent no one party who have zero influence over any party telling us what they will tell the sitting party (cough) Tory what to do in the event of a no vote, well good luck with that one boys,
     
    Alex Douglas Hume anyone? 

  27. Juteman says:

    @John King.
    Just watched that.
    This is the start of a concerted campaign to fool the voters into thinking No means Devo Max.

  28. caz-m says:

    Better Together recruit Prof. Jim Gallagher, who is going to tell us all of the bright new future that awaits Scotland after a NO vote.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25657929

  29. caz-m says:

    O/T

    Leaked document sent to EIS teachers union leader Larry Flanagan from his very close pal and fellow teacher’s union rep Johann Lamont.

    “If any of them wee bastards turn up at school thinking that this is a somethin fur nothin dinner hall then they ur in furra a fuckin shock.

    If they’ve no goat any money fur their dinner then tell them tae fuck off. A opened awe they food banks so the wee scroungin cunts could get fed in their hooses. They’re no happy geeting a meal in the hoose fur fuck all, they also want tae turn up at school and get another wan fur fuck all.

    Don’t you go awe saft oan me Larry, ye gie them an inch and they’ll take a fuckin mile”.

    Luv Wee Jo

  30. Robert Louis says:

    I have to say, I agree with others, regarding Kenny MacAskill.  At one time, I had the greatest respect for him, but his insistence despite masses of advice to the contrary, to proceed with the abolition of corroboration in Scots law makes him look a fool.
     
    Sadly, I think this has been driven by nothing more than his own ego.  It has been said that some cases cannot proceed due to the requirement for corroboration, due to lack of evidence, to which any right minded person would say ‘Amen!’.  If there is insufficient evidence, then it is quite right that a case doesn’t proceed.  It is what ensures wrongful convictions don’t happen.
     
    In addition the requirement for corroboration, helps ensure police officers do not lie in court, as it invariably requires testimony of two – so if one is lying, then the other officer also has to risk his career to back him up under oath.  No wonder the police want to end corroboration.
     
    I have watched Kenny several time try to argue for this change, and in every instance, his reasoning was ridiculous.  With this move, he is single handedly destroying Scots law, and will likely cause many, many wrongful convictions in future.
     
    So far as I understand it, every Scottish law lord (apart from just one) has stated it will be a very, very bad idea to remove corroboration.
     
    Either Kenny has lost the plot, or he is being set up for one almighty fall.  Perhaps as others have said, he has been in the post too long.

  31. gerry parker says:

    @Ken 500.
    In addition, there are many strong historical links beteeen Scotland and Russia.
    http://www.glasgowwestend.co.uk/people/theleningradalbums-wilmastark.php
     

  32. Luigi says:

    Albamac
    Just posted download links for Chapter V conversions but they got swallowed.  Akismet?
     
    I could not download the chapter 4 you posted earlier. The first three were ok.

  33. Robert Kerr says:

    Hi all.
    WoS seems to have deteriorated into an “opinion blog”.
     
    It used to be a source for useful things to help the cause.
     
    Where have all the links gone? The internet is our strength. Please use it folks.

  34. Albamac says:

    @Luigi
    I could not download the chapter 4 you posted earlier
    Tested before I posted it, Luigi.  I’ve just clicked on the link again and it’s fine.

  35. Ivan says:

    Did I just hear Jim Galagher say on GMS that the only economic lever “they” want for an independent Scotland is corporation tax?

    Maybe a case for a “…is a liar post”. Didn’t take long.

  36. auldacquaintance says:

    O/T but of interest to exiled Scots

    http://auldacquaintance.wordpress.com/2014/01/09/coming-home/

  37. Ken500 says:

    Russia and Scotland have always had links, just like the many links Scotland has with Europe. Much of Russian economic problems stem from the damaging affect of 11WW and the subsequent build up of redundant weaponry for future defence. Instead of consumer commercial activity, Russia became paranoid and turned on itself.(understandable?) The Russians like a tough guy – Putin.

    The irony is Poland was handed to Russian dominance at the Yalta settlement after the War. This led to Poland’s economic decline, which is why they emigrate other countries in Europe to find work.

    Germany (Japan) economic development benefited from no being allowed to re-arm by the Allies and releasing the equivalent of £multimillions to improve their economies and their
    wealth. ‘The losers spoil’.

  38. Boorach says:

    @ Albamac & Luigi
     
    That link works fine for me. PDF version anyroad.
     
    Albamac, my thanks for the sterling work you are doing with this wonderful book, makes it so much easier for my rheumy old eyes.
     
    Looking forward to chapter 5!

  39. Ken500 says:

    WoS is excellent. Phenomenal

    Working tirelessly to provide useful information to help the cause. Unbelievable.

    How do they do it!

  40. Spout says:

    Jim Gallagher, “Director General for Devolution”, Scottish civil servant, professor and company director:
     
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Gallagher_%28civil_servant%29
     

  41. Robert Kerr says:

    @Ken500
     
    Yes Ken you are the worst offender. Many posts with no links to back up your opinions. You use the very phrase I included in my first post. Caught!
     
    I do not read anything you post now. You have joined OBE in the Herald as far as I am concerned.

  42. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “WoS seems to have deteriorated into an “opinion blog”.
    It used to be a source for useful things to help the cause.”

    Huh?

  43. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Jim Gallagher, “Director General for Devolution”, Scottish civil servant, professor and company director:”

    That video’s odd. It’s titled “How Scottish independence could be good for the North of England”, but what he’s actually talking about is greater Scottish devolution within the UK.

  44. braco says:

    Boorach,
    could I ask for some advice on how you registered to vote with no permanent fixed address as such, please. I think you mentioned on a previous thread that you are registered, but with no address against your name on the electoral register.
     
    I am very interested in this as I am heading home in a few days and would like to concentrate on voter registration once I am settled. One of the big problems I see ahead of me, is that some folk really do not want to register as the electoral register can be used (and is used) to track down folk in financial trouble with unpayable debts scared of debt collection agencies and court judgements etc.
     
    These are actually the very folk who are most likely to be disillusioned with today’s Britain and more than willing to vote for change, but through fear are disenfranchised from the one vote that could really help change their own (and others) situation. So I thought if there was a way I could help them register to vote safely, it would be a great tool to have in our armory.
     
    Any help with this would be really appreciated.  Cheers min!

  45. Boorach says:

    @ Braco
     
    It’s very, very easy actually. Perhaps too easy!
     
    I simply enquired at the local council service point (enquiry office, call it what you will), explained the situation and asked for necessary form. As I couldn’t provide an address I was told I would have to personally attend the nearest permanently staffed Registrar’s office.
     
    For me that involves going to Dingwall a round trip of some 30 – 40 miles. On going there I simply completed a form (one side of A4) and that was it! No proof of identity, not even a driving licence was required!
     
    So once a year I trundle along to Dingwall, the lassies all know me, and the form is produced before I even have to ask for it
     
    Now, though it’s not shown on the roll, my address is a forestry commission car park and any mail the Registrar/Electoral Commission care to send me is actually directed to their own office for collection!

  46. braco says:

    Boorach,
    Thanks a lot for the info. Do you think that I could collect a form for an individual and help them register, by returning the signed form on their behalf, or maybe posting it back to the registrar? Or is it a must that each individual appear in person?
     
    Also does the form require that you swear that you have no current address. I ask this as I was thinking about this method of registration as an alternative for those with an address but unwilling (through fear) to risk it being accessed by debt collection agencies if given to the electoral roll. They could simply register as no fixed abode or as you say a carpark  etc.
     
    I was thinking that this could be the basis of an interesting leafleting campaign.

  47. Boorach says:

    @ Braco
     
    Drop me a line at bill_urquhart [at] hotmail [dot] com and I’ll probably be able to be more candid!

  48. braco says:

    Boorach,
    cheers min, I will.

  49. braco says:

    Actually Boorach, perhaps we should drop this for now. You have given me plenty info for me to chase up myself and I don’t think there’s any need for you to be any more candid than you already have been. Thanks again min, and let’s just see how I get on.

  50. LPW says:

    An interesting little excerpt. I’m not a big one for defending the distinctive genius of kindliness of Scots law, but the chapter is bang on about the sometimes ridiculous perils of having an appellate civil tribunal, deciding points of law they barely understand. This isn’t a distant prospect. In 1997, in Sharp v Thomson, by importing English law concepts of equity, the Law Lords almost buggered up the Scots law of property. For those who would welcome an end to this civil jurisdiction – an interesting point. Legally, there’s a strong argument that Holyrood (and in it, the SNP majority) could unilaterally cut the civil appeal to the UK Supreme Court. Read whatever you like into their failure to do so.

    http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/can-holyrood-repudiate-uk-supreme.html

  51. Robert Louis says:

    The ‘UK supreme’ court is nothing short of a London centric unionist charade, created on the back of a fag packet one day by Tony Blair, a few years ago.  Even worse however, was the original breach of the 1707 treaty when Westminster decided that Scottish civil appeals should be heard in the house of Lords.  That insult of course being complete a few years ago when those in London decided that they could just willy nilly move Scottish civil appeals to a pretendy court they had just made up in London.  
     
    I Cannot fathom why the SNP Government does not tackle the nonsense of the ‘UK supreme’  pretendy court head on.  It would be an awful lot more useful than going against just about every piece of authoritative legal advice and deciding to introduce a blanket end to the corroboration requirement in Scots law.

  52. Ken500 says:

    The UK Supreme Court is illegal. Westminster’s blocks the ‘the right of appeal’ to the EU court, as the right, under Scotland sovereignty.

    The corroboration Law doesn’t stop miscarriages of Justice but denies victims justice.

    Vote for Independence, so the SNP can end the injustice.



Comment - new users please read this page first for commenting rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use the live preview box. Include paragraph breaks or I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




↑ Top