The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Justice for some

Posted on June 01, 2020 by

We’ve been fobbed off again with another generic response from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, which again wholly fails to answer our simple and legitimate journalistic question, and to which nobody has been prepared to sign their name.

(We should also note in passing that not a single Scottish newspaper appears to have followed up on the story in that last link except the Sunday National, btw.)

But this one is considerably more disturbing. You can read it below if you want to know what shameless, transparent corruption sounds like.

Dear Rev Campbell

I would refer you to our earlier response to your email to our Response and Information Unit dated 5 April 2020:

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) takes seriously any potential contraventions of the Contempt of Court Act 1981. I can advise that we continue to closely monitor press coverage and social media and are actively considering if any articles or postings may give rise to a potential contempt. In such circumstances, careful consideration is given to whether any further procedure is required having regard to the nature and detail of the individual publication.

At this time on the basis of the available evidence it is not intended to take any action in relation to the journalists whom you identify in your said email dated 5 April 2020.

In relation to the specific questions posed in your email dated 4 May 2020, it would not be appropriate for COPFS to comment in respect of individual persons or reports in such circumstances, nor can we offer any assurances that no action would be taken against you should you publish something which could lead to the identification of a complainer in the case.

I understand that you have submitted a further email to COPFS yesterday, 28 May 2020. This email will be considered and a response issued in early course.

Yours sincerely

Response and Information Unit

It’s an extraordinary missive, in particular the fourth paragraph which we’ve bolded. On the one hand they say they do not intend to take action against the six newspapers who published the identifying information, but at the same time if I simply QUOTED THAT EXACT SAME PIECE OF INFORMATION USING THE EXACT SAME WORDS AND NOTHING MORE, they explicitly refuse to say that they wouldn’t prosecute me.

This, readers, is Schrodinger’s Law. The exact same paragraph is, we’re told, fine for Dani Garavelli to say in a national newspaper, but if I quote it I might end up in jail for two years. Scotland is openly a banana republic now, where justice depends on who you are and who you know, and the hate-crime bill isn’t even law yet. Good luck.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 01 06 20 12:56

      Justice for some | speymouth

    211 to “Justice for some”

    1. Jason Smoothpiece says:

      They can’t help just got to keep digging that hole a lot deeper.

      Disgraceful response they cannot think this will go away they must respond to the concerns which have been raised.

      I did say previously you could be next laddie COPFS back that up completely.

      Democracy who needs it.

    2. Sharny Dubs says:

      There goes the neighborhood!

      As I’ve said before an international embarrassment.

      Thanks Stu, more grease to your quill

    3. Blackhack says:

      I’m surprised you never realised that there’s an us and them before now….

    4. robertknight says:

      Lost for words…

    5. Frank Gillougley says:

      ‘Good night and good luck’, indeed!

    6. Ken says:

      When I said, only last week, that at least Scotland wasn’t a banana republic, perhaps I should have waited until you had a reply to your last communication.

    7. Patsy says:

      The legal territory seems to be a minefield at the moment, and to think some think Kafka is unrealistic. P.S. still not being notified of new posts by email even though I’m ticking the box below.

    8. Maurice Bowman says:

      If Scotland is a Banana Republic then how is it that Salmond and Wings (aside from expenses element) won their respective trials despite being at odds with the Scottish government of the day?

    9. winifred mccartney says:

      Astounding that they are not even prepared to sign the letter but within its contents is a not very well veiled threat to you. It becomes more and more obvious every day that it is who you know and what use you are to the state and the status quo that counts.

      They never learned the lesson when you are in a hole stop digging – problem is this hole is the state and they will not stop no matter what it takes.

    10. Ruglonian says:

      FFS, I’m appalled!

      Now there’s no doubt that this response was written knowing that it was going to be published here, so what exactly is its intent – to intimidate, or something?

      COPFS – since you’ve previously revealed that you’re reading BTL comments – we simply want to know why it’s one rule for us and another for others???

    11. mogabee says:

      They are taking the piss now.

      Basically the ‘media’ can say what the fuck it likes and the COPFS will hold their beer. Jeezo

    12. Ian Foulds says:

      Well said commenters and excellent work Rev.

      All be it the fabric of my wonderful Country is, at this time, in the hands of political and legal muppets

    13. Capella says:

      At this time on the basis of the available evidence it is not intended to take any action in relation to the journalists whom you identify in your said email dated 5 April 2020

      So there is no evidence that Dani Garavelli @ Co published information that would identify a complainant. Reproducing their text could not, therefore, be a contempt of court.

      Of course, that isn’t what the letter really says. It says that the COPFS does not “intend” to take action against the MSM journalists. But it does intend to take action against you and is currently taking action against Craig Murray and Mark Hirst.

      Looks biased to me.

    14. John MacKenzie says:

      This stinks. As an aside, why has this very serious matter not been taken up by anyone – ANYONE – in the Scottish or wider media? Perhaps we know the answer. On another point, Tory ministers are boycotting Piers Morgan on ITV’s breakfast show but going to the BBC and SKY. Like him or not, shouldn’t the BBC and SKY refuse to give the Tories their platform in support of the principle of free speech – as happened at the White House when Trump tried to ban someone he didn’t agree with?

    15. Breastplate says:

      They are a slithery bunch of chancers who refuse to answer simple questions in the aim to avoid any accountability whatsoever, hence the avoidance of a name.
      Anonymity seems to be one of their best friends along with duplicity.
      Surely it would be easier to just do the honest job that their paid for?

    16. dramfineday says:

      Wowsers! Para two, ‘we take this seriously’ Para three, the MSM journalists get a free pass (disproving para two). Then para 4, with the ‘but don’t you try it son’ threat.

      Wonder what Craig Murray is making of that?

    17. sog says:

      Was it signed and name removed by yourself? I fear not.

      Is it time for a crowdfund yet?

    18. Bob Mack says:

      When the law selectively suppresses the free speech of only a chosen few then you know you have problems.

      They try to threaten you into submission by the inference of prosecution should you cross a line others have done with impunity.

      This is not what I want Scotland to be.Ever.

    19. Breastplate says:

      They are being purposefully vague as there are too many ingredients can change.
      Time, evidence and intent are all variables used to avoid a proper answer.

    20. Giesabrek says:

      Where to now Stu? Back to the Justice Minister (don’t laugh) summarising that documented evidence that COPFS is selectively choosing who to prosecute when the same crime is permitted? And that those chosen appear to be on the independence-supporting type?

    21. Liz g says:

      Rev… Why would a Scottish Court order apply to you ?

    22. winifred mccartney says:

      I too have ticked the box below and still do not get email posts

    23. Tom Halliday says:

      Looks to me as though you will be the next target, regardless of what you do, the very fact that you have questioned their authority is enough to put a target on your back.

    24. Dorothy Devine says:

      Not only the media of Scotland but it seems the offices of the Crown Prosecution should be taking a long ,hard look at itself.

      Some time ago I remember a chap paying for billboards saying ‘Wanted ; an Honest lawyer in the West Coast of Scotland”

      Looks like he wasted his money for one might have been cancelled out by another.

      Augean stables anyone?

    25. dakk says:

      More proof if needed of how important the msm is to the establishment.

      The pretendy Levinson inquiry highlighted that also.

    26. ScotsRenewables says:

      What if thousands of us quoted the Garavelli article verbatim all at once all over social media?

    27. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Rev… Why would a Scottish Court order apply to you ?”

      Because my website is primarily read in Scotland and would count as being published there.

    28. Black Joan says:

      ” . . . again entirely FAILS TO AVOID”?? If only it did.

      Theatre of the absurd. Banana Republics R Us. Scotland and Englandshire.

    29. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Where to now Stu? Back to the Justice Minister (don’t laugh) summarising that documented evidence that COPFS is selectively choosing who to prosecute when the same crime is permitted? And that those chosen appear to be on the independence-supporting type?”

      The Justice Minister is clearly comfortable with that. In the first instance, I’ve sent this reply:

      “This is an appalling and wholly unsatisfactory response.

      (1) To whom am I speaking? It is not acceptable for this response to have been delivered anonymously. Who should I contact to escalate this matter? What is their name and contact details? Nobody appears to wish to accept responsibility for the actions of COPFS and that is extremely alarming.

      (2) Why on Earth would it be “inappropriate” to answer my question? It is part of COPFS’s job to prevent contempt of court, and that must surely include giving clear guidance to journalists about what they can and cannot say with regard to a case. There are no current proceedings in respect of the paragraph I quoted, so there’s nothing to prejudice. Can I quote the paragraph or can I not? It is a straightforward question and you are not Schrodinger’s Crown Office. It cannot be sustainable for you to say “It’s absolutely fine for Dani Garavelli to say this in a national newspaper but if you say the exact same words we might send you to jail”.

      This simply will not do. You are bringing your office into international disrepute, as I’m sure you will have noticed at the weekend. I implore you to fulfil your responsibilities before you make it any worse.”

    30. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Was it signed and name removed by yourself? I fear not.”

      No, of course not.

    31. susan says:

      Truly Kafkaesque Stu and sickening to think it’s happening in Scotland.

    32. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “If Scotland is a Banana Republic then how is it that Salmond and Wings (aside from expenses element) won their respective trials despite being at odds with the Scottish government of the day?”

      I didn’t win. I lost. That’s why I’m the one with a £200,000 bill. Alex Salmond won because his trial was held in front of a jury, but he too is hundreds of thousands of pounds out of pocket.

    33. Iain MacLachlan says:

      Perhaps everyone should duplicate Dani Garavelli’s paragraph and post it on any media available so that we can see how impartial they are. I’m kidding of course. But it would bring the system to a grinding halt I expect.

    34. Alex says:

      “at the same time if I simply QUOTED THAT EXACT SAME PIECE OF INFORMATION USING THE EXACT SAME WORDS AND NOTHING MORE, they explicitly refuse to say that they wouldn’t prosecute me.”

      That’s not what they say, mate.

      They refuse to say they won’t prosecute you if you publish it. And there’s legitimate reason.

      Publishing something which someone coulda with a lot of work, identify someone, if not the same as publishing something which you’ve insisted many times does identify someone.

      If you published it, given you utterly lack the self control not to refer to it as something which would identify a complainant, or hint as to that, you would be doing it.

      Let’s face it, you’re basically a kid asking for the precise details of what you’re not allowed to say, in a situation where boundaries have to be drawn and then whining that you don’t like where the boundaries are

    35. stonefree says:

      @ ScotsRenewables at 11:52 am

      I don’t think it would be wise, the theory is sound but in practise, not so sure.
      if one mistake then it no longer is Garavelli’s article and becomes the poster’s
      It’s a small point But??

    36. John Thomson says:

      I knew there would be a reason why this is not in all media, if it was they could not deny the evidence. The media and justice system are in it together, that in mind we haven’t got a hope in hell following the quietly section 30 route, open warfare is just round the corner and SNP is in the firing line.

    37. Athanasius says:

      Let me explain. 1) The Long March Trough The Institutions was a real, actual thing. It wasn’t a paranoid fantasy of the right. 2) That march is now complete. 3) The culture is now entirely socialist. 4) This is how the state behaves when it is socialist.

      Footnote: it’s important to understand that Keir Hardie, Nye Bevan, Clement Attlee and all the other giants of the old left – which in those days meant the Labour Party – were not socialists. They were simply seeking a more decent society. They won their battles, left the field and the void was filled up by the ideologues. Those ideologues now run the SNP, having left the Labour Party, which is no longer one of the “institutions” in Scotland, and consequently of no utility to their aims.

    38. N. Holmes says:

      This is what the Establishment closing ranks looks like.

    39. Muscleguy says:

      I added my name to the letter as well Rev. Whoever put all that together did very well. For the last two mornings I’ve been going through the Scottish press and despite this being in essence an SNP Baaaad story none of them even mention it despite it being signed by some really serious international names.

      We, along with the whole UK over Covid are in danger of becoming an international laughing stock and our respected justic system seen as partial and unjust.

    40. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Publishing something which someone coulda with a lot of work, identify someone, if not the same as publishing something which you’ve insisted many times does identify someone.”

      This is such horseshit. The “lot of work” required is Googling the two most obvious words in the paragraph, and given that the paragraph claims to be revealing earth-shattering information – we’re told that several political journalists “almost spontaneously combusted” on hearing it – any reasonable and even moderately curious person would do so.

      And I’m afraid that contempt law very explicitly makes clear that intent is irrelevant. If you published identifying information completely by accident you’re just as culpable as if you did it on purpose – “regardless of intent” is literally in the first line here:

      “Let’s face it, you’re basically a kid asking for the precise details of what you’re not allowed to say, in a situation where boundaries have to be drawn and then whining that you don’t like where the boundaries are”

      In fact it’s the exact opposite. My complaint is the absolute refusal to draw the boundaries, because doing so would inescapably lay bare the corruption. I want them to draw the boundaries, because if I can’t say it then neither can Dani Garavelli and all her pals.

    41. Robert Craig says:

      Private prosecution?

    42. ben madigan says:

      here’s potentially yet another example of “shameless, transparent corruption”

    43. Iain mhor says:

      @Capella 11:27am

      Indeed, I also inferred from the reply that it was selective. The interesting part, is the response being very careful to avoid stating there is no evidence of other transgressions; but of the evidence available (of which I also infer there is a considerable body re: monitoring widely) whether deemed transgressive or not – action would be selective.
      On the principle of ‘Pour encourager les autres’ no doubt.

      I also feel the response strays perilously close to implying that a law has become unenforceable.
      As all law functions by being put to the proof, iin this instance, there is one way to do so; it requires a collective publishing of an article deemed ‘non actionable’ (again, not to be conflated with ‘non-transgressory’) but that isn’t likely to occur.
      Still, you never know. Many names were keen to append to a recent open letter…

    44. Maurice Bowman says:

      “I didn’t win. I lost.”

      “So as far as I was concerned, in all but the financial sense I’d won the case and the financial sense was – despite the vast sums involved – emotionally a trivial one.”

      Are these two statements even compatible, or are we just into The Entire World vs Stuart Campbell territory at this point?

    45. Breeks says:

      If the aggressive colonialism of Westminster has;

      Compromised Scotland’s democracy with our democratic rejection of Brexit being overruled.
      Compromised Scotland’s Constitution with Scottish Sovereignty being overruled.
      Compromised Scottish Government via a legislature which is wholly subservient to Westminster.
      Compromised devolved issues of health during a National emergency by preventing Scotland from controlling it’s borders during a global pandemic…

      And now, the same colonialism further manifests itself as blatant bias in the Scottish Courts that is skewed by a colonial agenda to discriminate against supporters of Scottish Independence….

      They are already arresting Scottish Journalists on trumped up charges, just as they arrested Scotland’s former First Minister on trumped up charges of attempted rape which sought to trash Alex Salmond’s reputation while extending extraordinary protection to perpetrators of unlawful conspiracy…

      They are even shutting us down on social media.

      Friends, please tell me, what facet of Scottish life is free of colonial oppression and free to express itself without being denigrated or oppressed by British Unionism? Even the 700th Anniversary of Scotland’s Bannockburn was sullied by “British” Armed Forces day that was blatant in it’s malevolence towards Scotland’s simple celebration of being Scottish.


      If you still trust our chances with a democratic referendum or election in 2021 or beyond, then you are simply laying Scotland at the feet our enemies. You are a lamb marching to your own slaughter.

      It is now Constitutional legitimacy or bust. Scotland is a sovereign Nation by Constitution, or it is not. It is time for Scotland to ask the UN to intervene, and recognise our Nation, or see it abandoned to colonial usurpation and swallowed up forever beneath Westminster rule.

      It is my firm conviction the UN will not do that. The global family of Nations will stand by Scotland, as they did by implication in 1328, and the decrepit British Empire will see one more of it’s colonial annexations returned to it’s rightful owners.

    46. RJA says:

      Haven’t posted before but appalled to hear that you are facing £200 000 bill.
      Do you need another fundraiser – I’d be happy to contribute again.

      Scotland fast becoming a very scary place to live in – but perhaps not unexpected. With Scotland’s resources, they won’t be letting go so easily. As a Kashmiri, I can assure you of that!


    47. Breeks says:

      Godammit… Sorry Rev Stu. Another comment in moderation due to the “r a p e” word.

      Never a typo when you need one… lol

    48. george wood says:

      CM has been charged with contempt of court, which means repeating what he wrote to be charged in this manner would be a good way of getting yourself charged with the same offence. This is why paragraph 4 is there as a statement of the obvious.

      I know who the person is because of CM’s efforts not the journalist’s.

      I never knew of the existence of the article until CM pointed it out.

      If I had stumbled on it and read it , I would have dismissed it as biased and forgotten about it.

      It took CM’s prompting to cause me to do what I wouldn’t have normally done and investigate.

      That, to me, is why CM is on a charge of contempt of court. He published an article detailing how to identify someone who the courts decided should be anonymous.

    49. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “CM has been charged with contempt of court, which means repeating what he wrote to be charged in this manner would be a good way of getting yourself charged with the same offence. This is why paragraph 4 is there as a statement of the obvious.

      I know who the person is because of CM’s efforts not the journalist’s.

      I never knew of the existence of the article until CM pointed it out.

      If I had stumbled on it and read it , I would have dismissed it as biased and forgotten about it.

      It took CM’s prompting to cause me to do what I wouldn’t have normally done and investigate.

      That, to me, is why CM is on a charge of contempt of court. He published an article detailing how to identify someone who the courts decided should be anonymous.”

      That’s the most mindbogglingly stupid thing I’ve ever read in my life.

    50. Proud Cybernat says:

      I wonder how many pro-Union readers of this blog are happy with what they are witnessing here?

    51. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Are these two statements even compatible, or are we just into The Entire World vs Stuart Campbell territory at this point?”

      They’re compatible unless you’re a fucking idiot who can’t read words properly, yes. I won in the sense that I established what I wanted to establish. In the legal sense I absolutely unequivocally lost the case.

    52. Robert says:

      I’m warming to this one. Suppoes there were a private prosecution agaist the most blatant of the six journalists. If they are fould not guilty, Craig Murray’s not guilty; if they are guilty, then the Prosecution Service is obviously biassed.

      What’s to lose (apartf from more £)?

    53. Col.Blimp IV says:

      ” In such circumstances, careful consideration is given to whether any further procedure is required[,?] having regard to the nature and detail of the individual publication.”

      Is this supposed to convey that it is O.K. to “unintentionally” print material that could identify a protected person. – The Dugdale (AKA idiot’s) defence?

      But it is illegal to publicly point out the transgressions of said idiots.

      Or/and that certain (unspecified) organisations and individuals are immune from the law that binds the rest of us?


      Clearly Joe Public is not going to get a straight answers from this lot.

      Perhaps if we all asked our MSP’s, BCC ing Rev Stu and forwarding any responses … some useful intelligence may be gained.

      On the usefulness or otherwise of your MSP, if nothing else. … He will be asking you for your vote, in the near future.

    54. Vivian O'Blivion says:

      Franz Kafka lives and apparently works in the COPFS.

    55. Col.Blimp IV says:

      george wood @12:31

      So Craig Murray disguised himself as a serpent and tempted you to partake of the fruit from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil … God will not like that.

    56. Ottomanboi says:

      After the Scoto-English ‘Union’, during the Hanoverian pacification you could go to jail for being a Gaelic speaker. Effectively you were considered guilty before the law.
      Unionism will find a way to gag dissent.

    57. Josef Ó Luain says:

      @Maurice Bowman

      Because neither case should’ve been deemed competent in the first instance.

    58. Dave Hansell says:

      The sentence at the end of paragraph two of the communication is also clear and revealing:

      “In such circumstances, careful consideration is given to whether any further procedure is required having regard to the nature and detail of the individual publication.”

      In the context of the substantive issue which is the subject of the communication, what this passage openly concedes is that the basis for decision making within COPFS as to whether or not to proceed with action against a breach of legislation which is a contempt of court is based not on objective criteria but instead is blatantly subjective.

      The implied term of that statement is that COPFS determine action or otherwise in such cases dependent upon whether the information deemed to be in contempt of court is published by a source which they, not the law, subjectively choose.

      In colloquial terms what they are openly stating here is if they like you today no action will be forthcoming. You are safe. If they don’t like you then you are fair game.

      This openly drives a coach and horses through centuries of due process principles such as equality before the law. In spirit, if not in letter, the position set out represents its own contempt for common law principles.

      Again, in context, the passage is revealing in that it demonstrates a mindset which no longer feels it is necessary to hide in any way its corrupt practices, processes, structure, and nature. both organisationally and individually.

      Those who are responsible for writing it are openly gaslighting the citizenry, flaunting their corruption like a pound shop Messalina, and saying the law is what we say it is; it is applied selectively rather than equally at our convenience; and we really don’t give a shit who knows it any more.

      Of course, most sentient lifeforms with an operational brain cell suspect this is the case and has been for generations after a bit of life experience and observation. However, it represents a form of ‘rare treat’ to see the terminally corrupt provide a written and signed statement to that effect which openly concedes and happily revels in flaunting the point in such a way.

      As such it does represent a form of ‘progress’ in that (to put it bluntly in very contemporary and relevant terms), like a knee on the neck, there is now no pretence. Its out in the open just as the same corruption, contempt and arrogance is out in the open across the pond.

      According to the information flowing around on SM during the last day or two “The Leader of The ‘Free World'” had to shelter in a bunker from a bunch of twenty year olds over the weekend.

      Hubris certainly is a bastard. A bastard which history teaches us that even the most blatantly arrogant have to consider.

    59. george wood says:

      @ Col Blimp IV 12.57pm

      He’s not the messiah. He’s a very naughty boy.

    60. Millennium says:


      The Yoon media really getting desperate for what to actually ask Nicola Sturgeon at her Daily Beefing.

      One guy asked her:-

      “First Minister, there was a human shit found in Glen Coe at the weekend, are you still proud of Scotland?”


      Scuse the pun,,,but that guy is an arsehole

      He had all weekend to think of a question and he came up with that.

      I wonder what he will ask tomorrow?

    61. Frank Gillougley says:

      McCarthyism alive and well in the Scottish Judiciary. How detached from reality are they? All bureaucracies are self-serving, indeed.


      Long gone.

    62. Oneliner says:

      I see that your reply has come from the Response and Information Unit (sic). Possibly your concern has been passed to them by the Development Group Core Team.

      It might have served you better had it been processed by the Steering Committee Task Force which is more closely aligned to the Advisory Panel of the Policy Implementation Think Tank. Only then could you be confident that the evaluation criteria had undergone the due diligence process.

    63. John Jones says:

      If this was France they would be on the streets, what’s the matter with us that put up with this shit?
      It’s getting to the stage where pensioners are willing to go out and cause havoc to show we are not going to suffer any more of this.

    64. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scottish justice is British justice, which is supportive of authoritarian English nationalism. This political bias permeates the Scottish legal Establishment, and points to the cultural colonisation of Scots law and practice. Full text.

      International Journal of Constitutional Law, Volume 13, Issue 2, April 2015, Pages 530–544
      How proportional is proportionality?

      Proportionality is a set of rules determining the conditions for a limitation of constitutionally protected rights. It is the mainstay of the protection of constitutional human rights in many Western democracies and worldwide. Aharon Barak’s Proportionality is probably the most important and comprehensive book written on the subject to date. The essay presents several key arguments concerning the weaknesses of proportionality in the model proposed and developed by Barak, and shows how Barak’s rejection of various arguments against proportionality is not fully convincing.

      The essay suggests that the benefits of Barak’s structuring of proportionality are more modest than Barak maintains; points out the weaknesses of Barak’s approach in regard to the interpretation of constitutional rights, which entails a trivialization of the rights and has problematic consequences for the interpretation and application of proportionality as well as undesirable symbolic connotations; and asserts that Barak’s approach increases the problem of incommensurability, which is inherent in the doctrine of proportionality. The essay claims that despite the importance of the book it does not provide a satisfactory answer to many difficult and complex problems regarding proportionality.

    65. Capella says:

      In France “The law in its majestic equality forbids both the poor man and the rich man from sleeping under the bridge. ”

      Here we have the opposite – it is perfectly legal for billionaire newspaper proprietors to publish whatever damaging material they like. But a blogger! Zip it.

      Is this white collar crime carried out in the course of professional duties? It does bring the COPFS into disrepute.

    66. jfngw says:

      If you want to draw a parallel, it is a Scottish elitism similar to Johnson/Cummings. There are rules for the multitude but exceptions for the favoured, the elite of Scottish society is exempt.

    67. defo says:

      Even knowing that they have the system wholly under control, there must be a fair bit of clenching going on up at the Wolfe’s lair today.
      Enjoy the thought.

    68. John D says:

      Davie Hansel @1:19
      Thank you and spot on . But hey ! What we gonna do about it ?

    69. Willie says:

      I think anyone, anywhere in the world looking at what has been going on here with Salmond, Murray, Hirst et al would recognise Scotland’s Police and Prosecution Service to be reminiscent of a 1950s Latin American country.

      Both of these institutions have been shown to be thoroughly corrupt and this latest response to the Rev reinforces that. Indeed with eminent political luminaries from around the Globe recognise it then you know that Scotland’s police and prosecution is a pig sty.

      It therefore begs the question why ordinary citizens should abide by anything the Police and Prosecution do or say. They are compromised, partisan, and corrupt and are thoroughly discredited, and a society that cannot trust or is at war with its its police and prosecution is an unstable society.

      Northern Ireland showed us that.

      Of course like America, like Trump, the establishment can harden up.Guns, batons, and teargas on the streets is not exactly unknown in the UK – and such behaviours caused the peaceful inception of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association ( NICRA) before it was bludgeoned to create what became a thirty year he’ll.

      Would they do that here in Scotland. You bet they would. But in meantime let us plug away at the fading democratic levers that are being choked off by an ever more malevolent and corrupt system now being shown as such.

      They may have their knee on our neck but we know it.

    70. Col.Blimp IV says:

      John Jones says: at 1:40 pm

      “If this was France they would be on the streets, what’s the matter with us that put up with this shit?”

    71. Maurice Bowman says:

      According to the courts…

      Salmond = NOT a sexual predator
      Campbell = NOT a homophobe

      …yet apparently the legal system is in a banana republic level of dysfunctionality. No victim complex issues going on here whatsoever, nosiree.

    72. And spouse says:

      I’m ashamed

    73. Republicofscotland says:

      There’s something rotten at Holyrood, in the Scottish government to be precise that Humana Yousef can allow this debacle to continue. Don’t they realise we can see what’s happening, prosecute Murray and Hirst but turn a blind eye to those unionist hacks that actually revealed info on the women’s when Murray and Hirst did not.

      It stinks to high heaven,it makes a mockery out of Scottish justice, I’d wager Westminster is pulling the strings on this one, and a compliant Scottish governments is playing along.

      If this kangaroo court goes ahead and Hirst and Murray are found guilty and imprisoned for nothing more than using free speech to inform the public of machinations surrounding the Salmond debacle then I despair, that Scotland will be lost unless we the masses organise and demonstrate.

    74. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “According to the courts…

      Salmond = NOT a sexual predator
      Campbell = NOT a homophobe

      …yet apparently the legal system is in a banana republic level of dysfunctionality. No victim complex issues going on here whatsoever, nosiree.”

      Two innocent men, both punished to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds and still constantly subjected to mainstream and social media smears about the things they were found innocent of. Yeah, all sounds tickety-boo, mate. Piss off.

    75. wullie says:

      Are there any institutions in Scotland that do not work for England. I doubt it, we have been hung out to dry. Looks like anyone can take the p@*ss out of Scotland and the Scots 24/7/365. Probably been the case since 1320 when the establishment of the day thought , to hell wi this can’t have the lower orders with power.deciding what we can and cannot do. And so it continues.

    76. Bob Mack says:

      The only explanation apart from endemic corruption is that Prentice QC has been humiliated in court with a case the he felt could not lose because of the sheer weight of accusations against the accused. He did.

      He became a laughing stock in legal circles and his ego was severely damaged.

      Could this be the revenge rather than the rational behaviour we would expect?

      I tend towards this, which must be equally problematic to Woolfe. If he is backing Prentice then he should not be in his position

    77. Joemcg says:

      OMG! A £200k bill?! You should seriously consider a crowdfunder Mr C. That’s brutal.

    78. All the talk about Cummings breaking lockdown what about prince Charles doing the same one of them being hounded the other a press blackout some thing the same as your case Stu., all corrupt and and the real criminals are the ones who are suppose to upholding the law not breaking it they insult our intelligence with impunity

    79. callmedave says:

      Why do we never get an answer
      When we’re knocking at the door?
      With a thousand million questions
      About hate and death and war

      Keep on knocking Stuart! 🙁

      Moody Blues track

      Numbers are on the BBC websites for three Nations except for the BBC UK or BBC England sites.

      England……….today…108……..Total…26722..BBC news
      UK……………no figs…………Total..*38571..*SUN

    80. Colin Alexander says:

      Stu Campbell

      That’s you telt. Don’t think any threats are idle threats.

      As you know, you don’t need to have committed a criminal offence to be facing the jail in Scotland.

      Oh, and avoid remote highland roads at night, even if lockdown ends.

    81. deerhill says:

      I think the letter is an attempt by “them” to goad the Rev. into publishing Gravelli’s article. This will be their chance to kick in his front door at 4am and seize all his computer equipment and go through it with a fine tooth comb.

      Rev, you probably have back-ups already, but it may be strategic to have back-ups of back-ups. They find the first lot of back-ups and think “job done”.

      I assume that, as the Scottish Justice System employs ex “journalists” there will also be ex shipyard people who have a City & Guilds in Construction and Fabrication?
      They might be called upon.

      To Mr. Bowman I would just say, If you have such a high opinion of Scottish Justice, why don’t you publish the Gravelli article on your site? I’m surely not alone in being willing to chip in a £ for your legal costs.

    82. Capella says:

      @ callmedave – thx for posting the covid 19 figures. It is remarkable that the BBC has been trying to hide the England figures for weeks now.

      I was really pleased to see that we have only one death in Scotland today. However, that is probably due to the low record rate at the weekend and it’ll be higher in reality. Nevertheless, it is going in the right direction.

    83. Stephen Armstrong says:

      This is UNIONISM!

    84. Helen Yates says:

      I’m speechless to be honest and beside myself with rage, I do hope however that you keep at it and eventually get justice, there surely must be someone in the system that isn’t corrupt.

    85. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Jesus Christ!

      Just checked my e-mails and discovered that I have been a fully fledged member of the SNP for about 4hrs.

      And either minor incompetence or bush-league corruption has already reared its ugly head.

    86. Dislogical says:

      It seems very strange to me, outside of outright statements from an involved party that believe there has been a miscarriage of justice, that written public comment counter to a verdict doesn’t count as contempt of court.

      All the post-verdict attacks on Salmons and Campbell have read to me as contemptuous in the extreme.

    87. Heather McLean says:

      Trying to read the latest Wings blog post that just arrived in my email box “Never changing, never learning” but it’s coming up as error 404- page not found?

    88. Heaver says:

      Trying to read the latest Wings blog post that just arrived in my email box “Never changing, never learning” but it’s coming up as error 404- page not found?

      Same here on both Firefox and Silk.

    89. Robert Louis says:

      This is a disgrace. Scots law is now a joke, a slimy, filthy, corrupt politicised joke.

      If this were happening in ANY other country, politicians from all political sides would be screaming loud and long as to how corrupt such a statement and legal application is. But here, in Scotland, our current Scottish Government seems to be just fine with this.

      If this were happening in Hong Kong, they would cry foul, if this were happening in Moscow, they would cry foul, but here, right here, in this so-called ‘progressive’ Scotland, OUR Scottish Government sits on its hands and does NOTHING.

      Anybody who is still in the SNP, needs to have a long hard think about the mismatch between what NS promised us, and what she is now delivering.

      This is not acceptable in a democracy. We simply cannot have a situation where one person can make a written statement, which is viewed by the law NOT to be an offense, yet another person, purely for their political viewpoint told that should they repeat that same statement verbatim, they may be prosecuted and jailed for up to two years.

      We should ALL take heed of the deafening silence from the First Minister and the Justice Secretary on this matter. It is no good, and simply not acceptable for them to hide behind the ‘we can’t interfere’ in legal process, when there is clear political jerrymandering of the legal system happening in broad daylight.

      So, here is how Scots law now appears to operate. If you support England’s rule over Scotland and hate Mr. Salmond and oppose Scottish independence, you can say and write whatever you wish, with impunity, even if in clear contempt of court. If however, you are pro-independence, and support Mr.Salmond, then the full weight of Scots law will be used without mercy against you.

      It truly is the stuff of a failed, corrupt, state. Anybody from the SNP care to explain? Anybody from the Scottish Government prepared to actually earn their salary and get this sorted, or is this what we should expect under a Nicola Sturgeon led SNP government??

      This will not do. This really will not do. No wonder the likes of Noam Chomsky and Roger Waters are now actively interested, and getting involved in this.

      And meanwhile, the so-called ‘scottish’ ‘media’ (aside from The National) pretend this is not even happening.

      This is truly scary, and I’m not sure Scotland is such a good country anymore. AND IT IS HAPPENING UNDER AN SNP GOVERNMENT.

    90. Robert Louis says:

      Deerhill at 327pm,

      I totally agree. That is EXACTLY what this looks like.

      I would never tell him what to do, but would urge him to refrain, since we and Scotland, really need him for this fight.

    91. Cath says:

      How long is the quote? What if it wasn’t quoted in a Wings article, but instead quoted on a particular day by loads of Twitter users, with a link to the original article? They’d look really daft trying to prosecute members of the public for that.

    92. callmedave says:

      Ditto! RE: new post. 🙁

    93. Robert Louis says:

      In fact this situation is even worse, since the said piece of text, which the letter refers to, could by order of court be taken down (as it is so far as I know still online). Yet if an indy supporter were to literally quote that text verbatim, they could be punished by a politically corrupted ‘legal’ process.

      Simply not acceptable. I wonder what might happen should somebody like Noam Chomsky, or other high profile non-unionist repeat it verbatim?????

      This is corrupt as hell.

    94. Andrew F says:

      Apart from the obvious double standards and attempt to entrap you, or anyone else they see as a target, into prosecution…what really is the issue?

      They quite clearly do not care that whats-er-name can be easily identified as one of the accusers (even way over here on the other side of the planet and with no independent knowledge I could work the identity out with a search of a few key details published by the establishment media).

      Everyone knows that the SNP Scottish Establishment is thoroughly rotten from its festering tail right up to its rancid head.

      Would it really make any difference if the “punters” knew the name in question? Really?

      Maybe that could be a Panelbase question: “If several major media outlets had published stories that could identify a prominent Scottish Government figure as an accuser in a high profile Court case and none of them were charged with contempt of court, would you agree that anyone reproducing parts of those stories should also not be prosecuted?”

      If it’s really important that people be able to have the opportunity to work it out, then maybe a simple montage of the relevant paragraphs from all the stories with full attribution and identifying notations – but otherwise NO additional text WHATSOEVER added – could be formatted into a single page document and anyone who wanted to print off a few dozen and hand them out could do so?

    95. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Robert Louis

      Maybe they have already tried to … but the English authorities said NO.

    96. Proud Cybernat says:

      Some pretty significant delay in page response to this article, Rev. It’s either really popular and being reda far and wide or you have a DOS attack on the go. Also 404 error with another of your articles today.

    97. Robert Louis says:

      Col Blimp IV at 429pm,

      If you mean what I think, i.e the Scot gov acting or not acting. It is as simple as this, IF the Scotgov wish to do something and London will not allow them, they need to speak out. They need to make it very publicly clear what is happening. Their silence on such a matter would make them complicit, whether their hands are tied or not.

    98. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scots law and practice is essential shite, as it has not been allowed to evolve naturally under its’ subourdination to English legal culture and the principle of parliamentary sovereignty. The only way that Scots will be able to connect to the rule of law and restore Scottish justice, is by defending our EU legal identities.

      Proportionality and the Balancing of Rights in the Case-law of European Courts

    99. robbo says:

      Personally I think their trying to badger bait .No signature on this piece of mince gives them the, “no me sir- wisnae me boss,I didn’t send it” blah blah. Entrapment me thinks.

    100. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Robert Louis

      What I was meaning was that as Rev Stu lives and works in England.

      McPlod just can’t charge down the M6 mob-handed and kick his door down, they have to go through the proper channels.

    101. Julia Gibb says:

      In summary “the official journalist approved by the State” may print anything they wish in breech of the Law. Anyone who copies them will be charged!

      The MSM close ranks and pretend everything is normal.

    102. F Mooney says:

      Quite shocked at the figures that you’ve quoted. I’m not rich but I can contribute. MSM sought to smear, while Craig sought to support. That is it.

    103. Stoker says:

      Struggled to get onto here Rev. First got message: Sorry, awaiting data-base loading (or something similar). Then at 2nd attempt it took forever and a day for the site to load.

      What sort of legal system replies to a complaint with an unsigned response, ie: anonymous?

      Any suggestions of mass protests outside Bute House or Humza’s residence or office will be quickly shot down with Covid-19 excuses. But something has to be done about this.

      How about the creation of our own pledge? Pledging to repeatedly destroy our ballot papers until those responsible are sacked, and that means the politicians whose watch this is happening under, and those in the media who are guilty are prosecuted.

      OK, a lot of folk may not go for that but we have to do something of note or just sit back and take it. This, as some have referred to it as, joke is anything but funny. It’s as serious as it can get. Pure blatant in-yer-face corruption.

      And whatsmore, today it’s Murray, Hirst and Campbell, tomorrow it’ll be our children and grandchildren. That’s not scaremongering or being farfetched it’s being extremely serious. And if the masses do nothing now who’s going to help you when it’s one of yours?

      The fact this can happen in broad daylight in 21st Century Scotland is not only embarrassing it actually makes me shake to my core with anger. Sturgeon and Co are certainly not selling a pretty picture of an independent Scotland are they? Not to the undecideds they’re not.

    104. Gerry says:

      Not been following this closely so forgive me, but I just wanted to check that you had put the PF local to this on the record.Not the office. An actual name.

      It’s the fiscal who personally judges whether prosecution is in the public interest or not, and anyone can report to the fiscals’ office. I presume you have done that to an actual named procurator fiscal who would be considered localto the alleged offence ?

    105. Stoker says:

      Cath wrote on 1 June, 2020 at 4:15 pm:

      “How long is the quote? What if it wasn’t quoted in a Wings article, but instead quoted on a particular day by loads of Twitter users, with a link to the original article? They’d look really daft trying to prosecute members of the public for that.”

      Yes, they would, wouldn’t they? And it would clog their system if everyone, who would do such a thing, @ it to the COPFS, Sturgeon and Yusaf. If Cummings can finger-swivel to the system not once but twice then thousands of Scots are entitled to expose corruption.

      NOTE : REMINDER : Please don’t be so daft, anyone who comes across that article, as to even think about posting a link on here. Don’t think Stu would be too pleased and you’d likely find yourself toe-punted for life, and certainly deservidely so.

    106. callmedave says:

      Numbers today updated:

      England……….today…108……..Total…26722..BBC news
      UK……………today…. 111…………Total..39045…WM Gov

      31st May yesterdays figures:

      UK ………….today……113 …….Total…..38489.. WM Gov daily update.

      So… 39045 minus yesterday 38489…= 556 from yesterday

      That 556 number is a few more than the 111 reported deaths today

      So where did the the extra 445 appear…deaths outwith hospitals?

      Aye! It’s confusing init 🙁

    107. Meindevon says:

      Rev I’ve donated just for the hell of it, via PayPal. The money has left my account but at the end of the PayPal transaction it said the (your) account was suspended. You might want to check you got it.

    108. callmedave says:

      Hancock & Co have been asked about the numbers of contacts made from the NHSE trace system that have been contacted about four times but no information. It’s like nailing a jelly to the ceiling. 🙂

      The Isle-of-Wight system seems to have been kicked into the long grass but Hancock & Co using that data to put in the mix they say.

      Mind you the FM was also canny with the trace numbers for NHSS in Scotland yesterday so must be par for course. 🙂

    109. CameronB Brodie says:

      I have insufficient knowledge of the situation to be able to recommend specific programming of policy, but here’s an ethical perspective anyway. Full text. 😉

      Managing risk: infection prevention and control

      This information aims to support registrants in understanding how to apply the following Standards of conduct, performance and ethics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

      6.1 You must take all reasonable steps to reduce the risk of harm to service users, carers and colleagues as far as possible.

      6.2 You must not do anything, or allow someone else to do anything, which could put the health or safety of a service user, carer or colleague at unacceptable risk.

      6.3 You must make changes to how you practise, or stop practising, if your physical or mental health may affect your performance or judgement, or put others at risk for any other reason.

    110. Mike d says:

      Willie 2:00pm.these people have learned nothing from northern ireland.

    111. Joe says:

      Wouldn’t it have been interesting if wikileaks had released the names and addresses of the Scottish officers of a certain secret society in a handy spreadsheet?

    112. CameronB Brodie says:

      Here’s another that may help shed light on the stunted development of Scots law and legal practice.

      The Benefits and Dangers of Proportionality Review in Israel’s High Court of Justice
      In the landmark case Beit Sourik Village Council vs. the Government of Israel, the Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice (HCJ), grappled with a highly charged question: should a state have to sacrifice its own security to improve human rights?1

      The Court answered in the affirmative and held that certain sections of Israel’s controversial security fence could not be built as planned.2 In these sections, the loss of human rights outweighed the security benefit of placing the fence through certain villages.3 Scholars from both sides of the political spectrum have voiced strong opinions about this case,4 and many of these debates have centered on the determinative aspect of the case: the court’s proportionality review.5

      This Comment will not grapple with politics, nor will it focus exclusively on the Beit Sourik case. Rather, it will analyze this case and similar cases to argue about the theoretical implications of proportionality review in HCJ decisions. Through an analysis of these cases, this Comment will determine the best way that a court could grapple with the issue of balancing security and the right to life and bodily integrity against other human rights….

    113. CameronB Brodie says:

      And another.


    114. twathater says:

      Is this the beautiful , empathetic , fair , socially responsible country we want our children and grandchildren to inherit and grow up in , or is it just a cesspit of corruption where those who consider themselves superior are protected and favoured

      As MOST people employed within the COPFS are just citizens like the rest of us , who want their country unsullied by this reviled behaviour I would ask that they consider their concience and act appropriately

    115. Sandy says:

      Just watching STV news regarding the weekend crowds at various beauty spots.
      How can control of the current virus be maintained with some of these assholes’ attitudes if the amount of litter left behind is anything to be judged by.
      CCTV all round. Minimum £250 fine first offence. No minimum subsequent offence.

    116. mike cassidy says:


      Maybe those extra numbers are IKEA related!

      WTF do they sell that people have missed buying so much for the last 9 weeks?

    117. Andy Ellis says:

      @ Stu Campbell

      I got an email notification from WoS of a new post entitled “Never changing, never learning” at 15.41 today, but when I click on the link it gives a 404 Error message?

    118. CameronB Brodie says:

      We are approaching the second quarter of the 21st century, yet Scots law has yet to codify legal protection for economic, social, and cultural rights. This is because Westminster considers itself sovereign and above international law. Brexit is clear indication that British constitutional law does not consider those living in Scotland to have a legal right to legal rights.

      Constitutional Rights and Proportionality

    119. Dan says:

      Hmm, where exactly does the money come from to pay for the running of these legislative, judicial, and executive bodies.
      One hopes whomever provides said funds are not guilty of funding corruption…

      Wonder if there is any chance some of the Police Team involved in the Salmond investigation could now put some effort into tracking and tracing the dozens of car loads of folk that spent the weekend around a Perthshire Loch during lockdown, seeing as there was a serious assault with a victim being rushed to Ninewells Hospital for treatment.

      Taxpayers fund all sorts of tech like ANPR and CCTV. One drive by with a cop car scanning or taking reg. numbers of vehicles parked all along the verge would have been a prudent move, especially when there have been continual issues at the location over the years.

    120. liz says:

      To all those suggesting a private prosecution, on you go, no one’s stopping you.
      Do you seriously expect the Rev to waste more cash in court when he won but lost the last one?
      There will be no justice here, so for now we have to accept that BUT the support CM and others are getting from world wide well know intellects, may be the thing which will work, we have to see just how blatant the law in Scotland is.

      Also, I never, ever in my wildest dreams thought I would question whether or not Scotland should be independent but now the doubts are creeping in.

      Paradoxically part of the problem is because we are not independent.
      The worse than useless opposition , hate indy so much, they constantly miss an open goal which could discredit the SNP.
      They are so dense and stupid, they attack the SNP on their strengths.
      If we were indy, we would have a range of decent politicians, the SNP would split and that would be an improvement.

      NS is MIA, she has no control over the party anymore.
      You have the abhorrent Nicolson saying L G B Alliance are sinister on the radio,the man should be suspended immediately for verbally attacking a protected group, but he won’t be.
      You then have that buffoon Blackford being interviewed on the same bloody programme, I can scarce believe it.

      At the moment NS is untouchable because gullible people think she’s doing great with Covid. The point is compared to WM she’s a genius but otherwise is good at speaking.

      I hope that ASs book will have some effect but don’t expect much. It will come across as sour grapes, he’ll get no backing from the media.
      The only hope we have with the SNP IMO, is Joanna Cherry

    121. liz says:

      Could someone tell me what words are automatically banned on here

    122. CameronB Brodie says:

      This one kind of hits two targets at the same time, which is nice. 🙂

      Public Protection, Proportionality, and the Search
      for Balance

    123. Tinto Chiel says:

      @ liz: r*ape and A*lba and t*raitor w/o the * are three but there may be others.

    124. Col.Blimp IV says:


      You could try splitting your message between 2 or 3 posts.

      and don’t include youtube links unless you delete everything to the left of www.

    125. Alex says:

      “My complaint is the absolute refusal to draw the boundaries, because doing so would inescapably lay bare the corruption. I want them to draw the boundaries, because if I can’t say it then neither can Dani Garavelli and all her pals.”

      Look, Stu, the boundary is that, blatantly, the Yes Minister parody which heavily alludes to names and outlines the idea of being a plot is contempt. The reaction of everyone to it was “that has to be contempt”, and he was asked to take it down as contempt and didn’t.

      That’s not corruption, that’s the rule of law

    126. Beaker says:

      @liz says:
      1 June, 2020 at 7:33 pm
      “Could someone tell me what words are automatically banned on here”

      I love Boris?

      Where’s my medication…

    127. bipod says:

      I see is back on form threatening imminent catastrophe if people don’t follow her silly lockdown rules. Where is the second peak in England nicola? Where is it in the rest of europe that have gone further and faster in releasing the lockdown? What makes Scotland so particularly vulnerable to this mystical second peak/wave? Nobody in the supine Scottish media will ask her these questions.

      She also said at her press conference that: “It’s ready to pounce, it’s ready to jump across all these bridges that we offer it.”

      Get a grip nicola and tone down your ridiculous scaremongering language. You have no evidence that lockdown has made any difference you even admit that someone in your own family caught the virus despite mass house arrest. Lockdown does not stop the spread of the virus, we don’t all live on islands.

      It seems that her new goal is to maintain the lockdown and restrictions in some form until the virus has entirely disappeared, which is obviously outrageous and will completely tank the economy and ruin countless lives. Maybe this is a tacit admission that her “test and protect” programme is a failure and a waste of time.

    128. Effijy says:

      We must support the Rev with whatever finances he requires
      Or there will be nothing left for us.

      This had been a blatant displace of bias from a whole
      Series of arrogant people who consider the law to be theirs.

      This must be added in to Alex Salmond’s book and hopefully
      It is well advanced.

      Looks like we do require a new Scottish political party who
      Aims for Independence and a clear out of all the cosy corrupt
      Institutions like these guys.

    129. CameronB Brodie says:

      Care to define your ethical and legal perspective, as you don’t appear to respect public health ethics or global health law? You do appear to be a Tory though. Just saying. 😉

      Sovereignty and Normative Conflict: International
      Legal Realism as a Theory of Uncertainty

    130. Terry says:

      Got the email too and when i click on it it says 404 error

      Plus Saturday’s Wings post – Coach and Horses – when i access that it flashes out of control so i cant read it – I’m not iT enough to know but hope someone ain’t trying to disrupt this site.

      Lawyers? When you look back at the likes of Thomas Muir – where are the courageous lawyers nowadays? Drinking at the unionist trough?

      Launch a crowdfunder if you need to! I’d gladly contribute as your voice is our voice

    131. Dan says:

      I think t*raitor minus the * automatically gets changed to tractor when the post is submitted so won’t get a post held in moderation.
      In my experience words containing the other banned words Tinto mentions such as Ther*apeutic will get a post held in moderation.
      My posts that occasionally get held in moderation nearly always end up getting accepted, but ultimately the btl comments will have moved on before that happens which can be frustrating for those who tried to add their input as it means a lot of folk will miss what they said in moderated posts which could have developed the discussion.

      I understood these words were banned way back because of them being used excessively eg. To describe Scotland’s resources being pilfered, or folk signing off their posts with Sore Elbow!
      However, things have moved on since then, and with GRA being a regular btl subject it is inevitable folk will occasionally use the word in the correct context yet have their post caught in moderation.
      It’s Stu’s site so ultimately his choice to keep it this way or amend it should he feel the need.

    132. Colin Alexander says:

      Anybody pre-judging and announcing their “verdict”, such as whether Craig Murray or Mark Hirst is innocent or guilty should read this:

      Contempt of Court Act 1981

      Found here:

      Also, here is the find a solicitor page, as you might need one, if you aren’t careful, as the COPFS say they are monitoring this site.

    133. CameronB Brodie says:

      This kind of hits two targets at the same time, as well, and hopefully indicates the threat faced by Scottish democracy. The drive to introduce gender-ideology into Scots law, destroy the potential for a universal administration of justice in Scotland. That’s possibly why Lord Advocate has allowed it to progress as far as it has. The Hate Crime bill makes it virtually impossible to rectify this legal incompetence and restore the potential for justice in Scotland.

      British constitutionalism and Brexit undermine the security of Scotland’s biological integrity. Scotland’s judiciary appear ambivalent to this injustice, as most of them are probably Tories.

      Biology, Equality, and the Law: The Legal
      Significance of Biological Sex Differences

    134. robbo says:

      bipod says:
      1 June, 2020 at 7:56 pm

      It seems that her new goal is to maintain the lockdown and restrictions in some form until the virus has entirely disappeared, which is obviously outrageous and will completely tank the economy and ruin countless lives. Maybe this is a tacit admission that her “test and protect” programme is a failure and a waste of time.



      Hi Ruth D(msp),

      Porkie pies again.

      How’s test and trace going in England btw,all good is it?

      Scotland’s has been running for 5 days now-just saying.

    135. I wonder if the `Alex` at 12.05 is the lame duck lawyer Alex Prentice,

      Alex Prentice is the lawyer that lost the Salmond case,

      400 citizens interviewed,unlimited funding, 20 police officers working day and night for 2 years,the backing of the whole scurrilous Scottish media,basically wanted for nothing,

      the whole of the rancid corrupt Scottish establishment,

      against one man,

      and Alex Prentice lost the case,

      (best feeling since Griffiths scored his second against England)

      mocked as a loser behind his back by all his peers,

      probably cost him a knighthood or a lordship,

      or it could be just some other random `Alex` that got `lawyered` by Stu.

    136. Ian Brotherhood says:

      ‘…entirely fails to avoid our simple and legitimate journalistic question.’

      ‘avoid’ should be ‘address’ or suchlike and I hereby claim my ‘alert reader’ badge.


    137. Dan says:


      Think you’ll have to wrestle it of Black Joan, but if you were an alert reader you’d have noticed this! 😉

    138. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Dan –

      Ach, bummer!

      I really REALLY want one of those badges!


    139. CameronB Brodie says:

      And this is why Brexit and the proposed GRA reforms would have virtually the same legal effect, as neither are compatible with natural law and a respect for international human rights law. They are both essentially forms of eugenics, a.k.a. government through FORCE.

      Four Applications of Embodied Cognition

      This article presents the views of four sets of authors, each taking concepts of embodied cognition into problem spaces where the new paradigm can be applied. The first considers consequences of embodied cognition on the legal system. The second explores how embodied cognition can change how we interpret and interact with art and literature.

      The third examines how we move through architectural spaces from an embodied cognition perspective. And the fourth addresses how music cognition is influenced by the approach. Each contribution is brief. They are meant to suggest the potential reach of embodied cognition, increase the visibility of applications, and inspire potential avenues for research.

    140. MorvenM says:

      If you haven’t yet signed the letter of support and would like to:

    141. robbo says:

      THE TELL

      Around 20 seconds into the vid

      Now i’m going to lie again.

    142. Dan says:

      Ian, badge wise get yersel a Papko approved SSAUOBR yin! 🙂

      In fact, where is the Pap as I’d liked to hear what the mortgage and job owning faction of oor society think of the rather concerning aspects of the subject matter of the article.

    143. terence callachan says:

      The COPFS do not have to prosecute everyone that breaks the law

      If you break a law without knowing you are doing so and the COPFS believe you did not know you were breaking a law they can warn you and decide not to prosecute

      If they believe you intentionally broke the law they will prosecute

      I think this is what they have decided

      They will say CM did it on purpose

      They will say the press say they didn’t know they were breaking the law
      They will say the COPFS believe the press didn’t know they were breaking the law

    144. Dan says:

      Terence, that doesn’t really stand as Garavelli tweeted the article had been “legalled” prior to publishing.

    145. Craig Murray says:


      It is an offence of strict liability. Intention is irrelevant. They are not claiming I named anyone on purpose.

      Good news is over 4,000 people have now signed the letter. The “famous” signatories have been joined by Brian Cox.

    146. Craig Murray says:

      Sorry, not named, obviously. Gave information which could contribute to the identification of…

    147. Frank Waring says:

      I’ve spent a long time thinking about whether I should make this comment, because it is possible that you will assume that I am one of your enemies and treat what I say acordingly.
      But — when the law says that ‘lack of intention’ cannot be used as a defence, it does not follow that prosecutors are somehow obliged to prosecute, even if it’s clear to them that someone made an innocent mistake.
      What happened was this: A fact that was elicited in open court could be combined with other widely known facts, to yield a name of one of the accusers. For this reason, the original fact should never have been openly reported, but it was. It was then quite widely quoted in the press, presumably because another of the facts in the same utterance could be used for the political purpose of attacking the First Minister.
      It would be impossible to maintain that Dani Garavelli had any wish to see any of the accusers’ names revealed — given the vigour of her defence of their anonymity.
      I’m certain that Craig Murray did not intend to reveal the name, either (and I’m supporting his defense financialy).
      But the prosecution will probably say that few people solved the cryptic clue when Garavelli published it — because few people realised that there was a cryptic clue to be solved, until Craig Murray pointed out where to look.

    148. Dan says:

      callmedave says: at 5:36 pm

      …That 556 number is a few more than the 111 reported deaths today

      So where did the the extra 445 appear…deaths outwith hospitals?

      This explains the increase. Text copied from news site.

      New reporting process sees 445 extra Covid-19 deaths added to UK total.
      An additional 445 people who died with Covid-19 have been added to the UK total following the introduction of a new reporting process.

      The new cumulative total of 39,045 deaths, announced on June 1, now includes cases identified under “Pillar 2” of the Government’s testing strategy.

      The article goes on to state that nearly all the 445 deaths were from care homes. The deaths were previously categorised as “probable” coronavirus cases, but have now been redefined as “confirmed” cases.

    149. robertknight says:

      I wonder how many who voted SNP, self included, imagined we’d be living in a tin-pot banana republic after a decade under an SNP Government?

      COPFS doesn’t make the rules but decides, apparently on a whim, who it forces to abide by those rules and who gets a free pass. (British Establishment MSM = free pass it would appear).

      Furthermore, they are apparently unaccountable to any citizen who takes issue with any decision the COPFS makes.

      After all, who are we mere mortals to question the almighty and omnipotent Scottish (North British) judiciary?

      What was it Bill Shakespeare wrote about lawyers in Henry VI? Seems the legal profession was held in equally high regard then as now!

    150. Bob Mack says:

      @Frank Waring,

      Then the law would be assuming ordinary folk have the IQ of a
      Loaf of bread..

      Most people could lock on pretty quick.

    151. Clapper57 says:

      @ Dan on 1 June, 2020 @ 8:37 pm

      “@Liz I think t*raitor minus the * automatically gets changed to tractor”

      Hi Dan , maybe if someone writes tractor it will automatically change to tr**tor…minus the ** obvs Lol

      Have a nice evening

    152. Ian Brotherhood says:

      From @FOWings, 13 mins ago:

      ‘Many folk who have signed up for email alerts for the latest WOS posts have brought to our attention that the link is going to an Error 404 message.
      It’s a simple scheduling error, nothing else, so the article will be available to you all tomorrow.’


    153. CameronB Brodie says:

      terence callachan
      That sounds plausible as Dugdale’s defense rested on her ignorance of what homophobia meant, didn’t it? IMHO, this claim had a vanishingly small probability of being honest and truthful.


    154. velofello says:

      The well tested weapon of the state, and the powerful, is the Tyranny of Money, the threat of penury on the individual.

      However, in the cases of Salmond,Murray, Hirst, and Wings, each of you are not standing alone. So if the state wants the weapon of choice to be money, fine. There are thousands of us, crowdfunding our arsenal. Litigation costs can draw from the crowdfund arsenal, professional reputations are not so well protected – “when push comes to shove.”- seniority wins.
      Money awarded is not the criteria of victory. Neither you nor Alex Salmond lost, your pursuit of justice cost the crowdfunding arsenal some resource, and your reputations are intact.And each crowdfunded justified defence of the individual against the state diminishes the state.

    155. bipod says:


      I think the English system is also a waste of time. The time for stopping the spread of the virus using contact tracing past a long time ago, millios of people in the UK have already undoubtedly already had it. Do you think that the Scottish contract tracers are doing something different, it is almost certainly having the same problems its just not being reported or talked about the same way the English one is.

      Why have the number of tests being carried in Scotland halved in the passed few days? The Scottish government have never once meet their testing targets due to how inaccessible they have made it.

    156. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Craig Murray

      Is that Brian Cox the space-time travel guy?

      I ask because I have just read a scan of a document that claims to know what you were doing on the 20th of August 2020.

    157. Col.Blimp IV says:

      23rd of August 2020 – I should have said.

    158. CameronB Brodie says:

      I doubt you’re a legal scholar but you could do with dipping your toe in this one, IMHO.

      Cognitive Biases and Heuristics in Tort Litigation:
      A Proposal to Limit Their Effects Without
      Changing the World

    159. bipod says:

      First the UK government had its five key questions that it needed answered before it would lift lockdown, now it has made up a colour coded covid alert system, unsurpisingly similar to its terror alert system, and nicola sturgeon has her four phase plan where she still hasn’t worked out the other 3 phases yet. Its just another PR stunt for the terrified masses, not based on any science.

      Scotland needs an evidence based approach to covid, not the Scottish govs fear based, evidence free, totalitarian approach. I found her press conference particularly amusing today, threatening scots with even more authoritarian actions for not taking her silly rules seriously. This isn’t North Korea.

      How can it be acceptable that after more than 2 months the National Covid Service Scotland has still not reopened all of its services when the hospitals sit half empty waiting for a surge that is never going to come. Disgraceful.

    160. robbo says:

      Go chase yirsel @bipod.

      You bet she’s got it planned that’s why you’re pissed.
      Lives come first, priority of any sain government.
      If you don’t like ,do wan

      Scotland is

    161. defo says:

      Ra polis don’t seem up for enforcing the SG distance laws.

      It was probably meant to be a bluff!

      I wonder what your average polis make of all this political dirt?

    162. CameronB Brodie says:

      You certainly have strong opinions but what is the scientific and legal basis of your judgement?

      Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk

    163. McDuff says:

      The silence of the SG is deafening.
      They all make me sick. We are sleepwalking into 1984.

    164. call me dave says:


      Thanks Dan for that explanation. Yes!…outwith Hospital deaths.


    165. Al-Stuart says:


      This is only the start. The truth WILL out.

      However, this Wings Over Scotland website has uncovered a litany of what many refer to as SNPBad that under “normal” circumstances would have the mainstream media all over the dirty rotten mess. They would be having a field day. For example this WoS article went nowhere in the MSM…

      It looks and has the whiff of MSM giving Nicola et al., and easy ride.

      Now we have the COPFS officials bringing that organisation into disrepute to such a clear and evident level that a first year law student win,d manage to prosecute the case. The person too ignorant or scared to sign the letters they author are leaving themselves and their bosses open to criminal charges equating to MALFEASANCE IN PUBLIC OFFICE.

      Stuart, whether they like you or not, there is a serious chilling of journalistic integrity. The Craig Murray case will echo way beyond Sturgeon and Yousaf. True lrofessional in the media would be caking this COPFS pile of festering merde out for what it is.

      My point?

      This ALL stinks to high Heaven.

      Watch your back now Stuart. The State did their best to silence Alex Salmond and neuter him forever as he and/or Joanna Cherry are the only ones left who can deliver Scottish Independence. Getting disd of these two will keep Scotland as an Imperialist British Empire owned Raj for the next 45 years.

      I still have faith that the cat will emerge out of the bag helped greatly by Alex Salmond’s book.

      The results are likely to be seismic. As bad for the British State as the Westminster MP and Lords Expenses Scandal. In fact far worse as Scotland is the only Crown Jewel left in the British Empire. They will not let us go without the mother of all fights.

      The current faux-SNP imposter leadership (riddled with State players), is as twisted and sophisticated as any Ian Fleming novel.

    166. bipod says:


      There is no plan, just PR stunts and reactions to hysteria. If lives come first why did they clear old folks out of the hospitals and into the care homes and why has the national covid service not fully reopened. I suspect the Scottish gov intends to continue this disaster all the way to october when the magic furlough UK blank check money runs out.

    167. jfngw says:


      The hospitals were expecting a flood of covid cases, so you believe the safest place for the old was in the hospitals. In theory the care homes should have been safer if the guidelines had been followed by these private care homes. They ignored the guidelines of isolation it would appear and failed to protect their staff. Maybe someone will sue them for negligence.

    168. jfngw says:

      I see Oklahoma was on at the weekend. One of my favourite songs:

      “The slurry with the skin on the top”

      Can hardly wait for the post Brexit US food deal now, can you?

    169. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “Look, Stu, the boundary is that, blatantly, the Yes Minister parody which heavily alludes to names and outlines the idea of being a plot is contempt. The reaction of everyone to it was “that has to be contempt”, and he was asked to take it down as contempt and didn’t.

      That’s not corruption, that’s the rule of law”

      I’m not an idiot, but I’m starting to think you are. I haven’t asked COPFS to say anything about the Craig Murray case, precisely because it’s a live prosecution. I’ve asked them to tell me whether I can quote a paragraph from a Dani Garavelli article which is NOT the subject of any court action. There is no earthly legal reason they can’t answer that question.

    170. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “It would be impossible to maintain that Dani Garavelli had any wish to see any of the accusers’ names revealed — given the vigour of her defence of their anonymity.”

      What’s your point? I’ve already shown you that INTENT DOESN’T MATTER in the eyes of the law. It’s very clear on that. And if Garavelli gave a shit about their anonymity she’d have removed that paragraph as soon as it was clear that it provided identification. Has she? No.

    171. Elmac says:

      I have joined this thread late so apologies if I am repeating what others have said. The implication in the paragraph highlighted by the Rev is that he could be prosecuted for contempt if he dares to repeat the exact words used by the printed media, those same words which the judiciary do not intend to prosecute. If you ever needed evidence of corruption in the legal fraternity in Scotland this is it. It is not just an admission of breathtaking bias but stupidity on wheels in putting this forward as part of their response. We pay these idiots – at the very least they should be able to threaten and lie more convincingly than that.

      I have had it with these people, I have had it with our yellow Tories, of whom I was a member and voted for over many years until 31 January 2020 when the penny dropped. Either the SNP is reformed root and branch now or a new party must rise. I want to live in a society free of corruption and privilege where people are valued by their contribution, not by who their parents are, where they were born, how much money they have, or what school they went to. I want to see criminality, especially in public office, punished. I want to see our media able to report facts independent of fat cat ownership and and bias. In short I want to live in a decent, caring society. What does it take for my fellow Scots to see what is being done to their country? We must either wake up now or go down in history as a nation of imbeciles.

    172. jfngw says:

      I believe the Scotsman stated the article had been legalled twice. It’s unlikely the Scotsman use cheap legal advice, it could even be these lawyers are acquaintances of even more senior lawyers. Have you ever tried to get a doctor to contradict another doctors opinion.

    173. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Elmac (11.40) –

      Hear hear.

    174. Shug says:

      The only way to get these legals on side is to follow them and see where they get their drugs, girls, boys, and any other matters
      Fleet Street are great at this as Cummings knows
      They have no end of weaknesses

    175. Achnababan says:

      jfngw… the legal advice to Garavelli probably came from her pals in the Crown Office. They all go to the same Gastro pub in Glasgow dont you know?

      While I agree that this is a British sponsored witch hunt against what they see as Independence ‘agitators’ I suspect that their real target is Sturgeon …. trying to draw out a move from her government and then they can slam her for trying to influence due legal process etc etc

    176. Stoker says:

      In Craig Murray’s article ‘Who Paid Dani Garavelli?’ Craig states that: “Legaling a piece is expensive. Legaling a piece several times is very expensive.”

      Craig also, in the same article, shows that Dani Garavelli personally stated that the “2nd legalling” was done by Scotland on Sunday.

    177. CameronB Brodie says:

      Talking of due legal process, here’s another for the Justice Minister and the Lord Advocate to consider. ;(

      Useful Sources: Biology, Evolution, and Law

    178. CameronB Brodie says:

      Scots law will be broken beyond repair unless the Justice Minister and the Lord Advocate are prepared to defend due legal process and ethical jurisprudence. Simples.

      Law’s Relations: A Relational Theory of Self, Autonomy, and Law

      Autonomy is one of the core concepts of legal and political thought, yet also one of the least understood. The prevailing theory of liberal individualism characterizes autonomy as independence, yet from a social perspective, this conception is glaringly inadequate.

      In this brilliantly innovative work, Jennifer Nedelsky claims that we must rethink our notion of autonomy, rejecting the usual vocabulary of control, boundaries, and individual rights. If we understand that we are fundamentally in relation to others, she argues, we will recognize that we become autonomous with others – with parents, teachers, employers, and the state. We should not therefore regard autonomy as merely a conceptual tool for assigning rights, but as a capacity that can be fostered or undermined throughout one’s life through the relationships and the societal structures we inhabit.

      The political project thus should not only be to protect the individual from the state and keep the state out, but to use law to construct relations with the state that enhance autonomy. Law’s Relations includes many concrete legal applications of her theory of relational autonomy, offering new insights into the debates over due process, judicial review, violence against women, and private versus public law.

      autonomy, relational theory, rights, human rights, women’s rights, private law, public law, due process, judicial review

    179. robbo says:

      Jesus. If you think it’s bad here.Trump has just invoked an 1807 insurrection act.US troops brought into Washington DC

      Just went up a level

    180. cirsium says:

      “careful consideration is given to whether any further procedure is required having regard to the nature and detail of the individual publication.” Yes, this is exactly what the protest letter was drawing attention to and I quote “The actions taken so far risk establishing a public perception that both Police Scotland and the Crown Office are conducting themselves in a manner which is biased and is indeed political in nature.”. Thanks for pursuing the matter, Rev. It is shining a spotlight on the corruption.

      Good comment, velofello, 9.48pm, 1 June. Guess it is not just South American dictatorships using lawfare to huckle political dissenters.

    181. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Elmac says

      “We must either wake up now or go down in history as a nation of imbeciles.”

      That we must and the Wokesters of Jacksons Entry are on this issue near to comatose.

      What wiith our minus 5,000pa births to deaths problem and their 350,000 in 300.00 out per anum solution.

      (old fag packet from memory figures – check for yourselves)

      The Scots risk being erased from the history books altogether before the imigrants and their offspring have the time required to come to the conclusion that they are Scottish rather than British.

      N.B. 200,000 of those prospective “New Scots” are lifelong Britishers from elsewhwere in the UK.

    182. CameronB Brodie says:

      Time for a bit of Clinic Ethics? Brexit removes Scotland from EU environmental law and the precautionary principle, without which it is not possible to support public health ethics and global health law. The proposed GRA reform is not compatible with either PHE or GHL, and would destroy the potential for due legal process and a universal administration of justice in Scotland. A gender-critical approach to policy design is considered “best practice” for ensuring due legal process, but our civil service have been instructed to follow an irrational approach to the law that lacks coherence with existing legal doctrine.

      Scotland’s justice system is under legal attack from those who should be defending it.

      Beyond individualism: Is there a place for relational autonomy in clinical practice and research?

    183. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Col.Blimp IV at 9:58 pm

      You mentioned,

      “Is that Brian Cox the space-time travel guy?”

      No it’s not. He’s the one in the pic below, wearing the EH! badge that I had just given him, in August/September 2014.

    184. twathater says:


      And it is heartening the amount of signatories appended , the COPFS and SG should take note we will not go away ,and we will not be fobbed off , transparency and accountability is required

      BTW has anyone counted the signatures

    185. Christ, I find this all utterly tragic. As an artist, however, I have been a Free Speech advocate for my whole life. I donated money, as a fresh-faced teen in 1987, to the No More Censorship Defense Fund, when the American government were trying to prosecute the Dead Kennedys. My name is on the back of the first two Jello Biafra spoken word albums. I never dreamed that, in my lifetime, Scotland would become the he-said-she-said, reds-under-the-bed, tattletale-scoffing Hellhole it has become under Nicola Sturgeon’s sterling steering (us off a cliff). It’s a total tragedy. But I support Stu and Craig Murray (just signed the online letter) and Free Speech 100% 24/7 365 FOREVER. What a parochial, corruption-ridden place this beautiful country has become. Hurts my head and heart on a daily basis. But we’ll get through it. We have no choice.

    186. Robert Louis says:

      A;-Stuart at 1105pm,

      Totally agree. Let’s just say RevStu should avoid going for long walks in the highlands – and it’s not bears he should be worried about.

      The whole thing is rotten, corrupt as corrupt can be, but those of us watching have seen the corruption for the last two years, at least.

      This will not do. As regards, RevStu, I am sure he is smart enough to play them at their own game.

      Mr.Salmond’s book cannot come out soon enough. Their is now a pressing need to clear out some of the unionist scum who have clearly infiltrated the SNP at the very highest level.

      On reflection, it is odd, isn’t it, that this cursed union with English colonial rule over Scotland is so bad, they cannot maintain it without resorting to dirty tricks, lies, press manipulation and political prosecutions. The kind of thing that might be expected back in the old USSR, or the communist GDR. Josef Goebbels would be proud.

      If this cursed undemocratic union with England was any good, the question of independence would never even arise, yet instead of trying to make it better, London resorts to lies, dirty tricks and corruption. Colonial Britain England at its very worst. Scotland is truly cursed by our proximity to these lying gits in England’s government.

    187. Effijy says:

      Tory Minister Tobias Elwood on TV with Piers Morgan
      Suggests that Boris must keep Cummings as he is so
      Good at Political tactics we can’t do without him-
      He won Brexit, the General Election and-

      Cummings has all the powers he wants and is answerable
      To no one.

      Westminster Politics is absolutely insane!

    188. Effijy says:

      Piers Morgan now discussing a new Tory bill
      That says people in a physical adult relationship
      But not living together cannot have sex until the
      Virus is defeated?

      Looks like the younger generation may die of frustration
      Before a vaccine is found.

      Tobias is yet another arrogant Tory Toff who is far too good
      To be answering questions for the likes of us.

      Scotland must completely detach itself from these horrible excuses for human beings.

    189. Robert Louis says:

      Dominc ‘let them die’ Cummings. Unelected, unaccountable, unqualified, never undergone HR assessment, never undergone Civil Service assessment, answerable to nobody, not even the police.

      Now we know, it is he, and not England’s clown Prime Minister Alexander Boris De Pfeffle Johnson, running the country.

      The HIGHEST Covid death rate in the world, courtesy of Dominic ‘let them die’ Cummings. We can only hope, that sometime in the future, that sicko, is held to account, and put in jail for the rest of his life.

    190. Effijy says:

      Must admit I was never a Piers Morgan fan but he is on fire today.
      Tobias Tory nailed for lying about UK excess deaths.
      He tried to say Italy and Germany don’t include these in the Covid Death
      Figures but in fact they do.
      Well he is a Tory and if their lips move they are lying.

      Bottom line the UK has a true figure of 65,000 Covid Deaths, not 39,000.
      Both sets of figures makes the UK the second worst on the planet, behind Belgium
      For death ratios per million of population.

      Tobias just shrugs his shoulders and insists he came on the discuss the situation in Hong Kong???

      Masses of people are dying due to Tory incompetence, an unelected fascist is running the country,
      Tory supporting companies are making unjustified fortunes with non disclosure contracts and Tobias
      Wants to tell China how they should be running Hong Kong.


    191. Willie says:

      America is an ill divided country. They have inbuilt bias built into their rule of law.The policeman who put the knee on George Floyd was no different from the Police unit who tried to put the knee on Salmond, and who now in conjunction with the Crown seek to put the selective knee on Craig Murray and Mark Hirst.

      And It is the same knee as that was applied in Northern Ireland and the very same knee again as was applied to the blacks in apartheid South Africa. And now the cycle begins here in Scotland.

      But the knee of suppression can be broken. Can be lifted. It does not need to be this way. History tells us that. Tells us that this very day.

      To misquote a phrase said some years ago. The ( insert individual as appropriate ) think they are privileged, that they are all powerful, but they need to be privileged and all powerful all the time, else they will be unlucky.

      So do they feel lucky. It seems for the present that they do. But things change.

    192. Effijy says:

      I’ve signed the “Let’s single out and imprison Indy supporting journalist” petition.

      Just forwarding it on to some others I’ve thought of.

      Do we know how many signatures it has in total?

    193. Alex says:

      “What’s your point? I’ve already shown you that INTENT DOESN’T MATTER in the eyes of the law. ”

      No, you haven’t. You’ve shown that intent does absolve you of responsibility in the eyes of the law.

      That something can be illegal when done without intent does not mean that intent doesn’t matter.

      Just because killing without intent isn’t illegal doesn’t mean that intent to kill does not matter…

    194. Polly says:

      Yes it is Kafkaesque. The “nature and detail of the individual publication” line especially is problematic since it shows the willingness to judge by different standards depending on what is viewed as legitimate publications opposed to others. Considering there is such a fall in old and rise in new media there should no longer be such a differentiation. The same article published anywhere or pieces of it quoted by anyone should always incur the same response. Not to do so looks very like partiality towards some and bias against others. Two pro independence people charged with contempt, another threatened with it is not a good look whatever legal justification they believe they have.

      As for failing to sign that reply above, that’s just a disgraceful means to try to stop further enquiries.

    195. Col.Blimp IV says:

      Brian Doonthetoon

      Oh I see, so “Brian Cox” is just his Twitter Handle … In real life he is that Bob guy from Broughty Ferry.

      Top rank detective work.

    196. The real Stuart Campbell says:

      Here is an idea, although I admit I dont have the foresight of most posters here, but if an article by Dani Gravelli could be used to identify, by a simple google search, two of the anons in the Salmond trial, then why dont 1000 of this blogs readers state in a private recorded delivery letter to COPS as a complaint and name the 2 individuals and site Gravelli’s article as the source along with the google search response.

    197. Bill Craig says:

      I don’t know if this has been mentioned, but there was an interesting item on the radio this morning about the Financial Services Authority now taking a test-case against an insurance company for failure to honour its contract with a small business in Edinburgh. The company had taken two and a half months to respond to a claim (related to business shut-down as a result of covid-19), and subsequently stated that there were no Covid-19 cases in the Edinburgh area. (Nike conference?)

      So, just following the lead of the Tories by starting with an outright lie after the initial silence didn’t work.

      I wonder if there is, or could be, an independent Legal Services Authority which could challenge the Crown Office. (I prefer to call it that, rather than COPFS, because for me it indicates a body that seems to have an attitude of entitlement, way above us mere plebs)

    198. Dave Hansell says:

      Colin Alexander 8:38pm June 1:

      Interesting link to the Contempt legislation.

      Particularly this bit in Section 1:

      “(2)The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.”

      Which seems to ring a bell.

      I’m sure I’ve seen a written publication in the form of a letter somewhere abouts recently in which the originating organisation has:

      A. At least tacitly acknowledged and accepted without challenge that its communications on the specific matter are being put into the public domain.

      B. Demonstrates a clear stated contempt for legal principles of due process and equality before the law which satifies the criteria in that sub-section of the legislation of seriously impeding or prejudicing a current case being brought against two journalists.

      But you know what your minds like when you get to a certain age. I seem to be having a senior moment because I just cannot recall where I’ve seen this recent clear cut example.

      I’m sure it will come back to me eventually.

    199. CameronB Brodie says:

      This is what the Justice Minister and the Lord Advocate appear desperate to separate Scotland from. As it is hard to avoid a state of totalitarianism without an appreciation of aesthetics, one has to question their intentions.

      Aesthetics and the Embodied Mind: Beyond Art Theory and the Cartesian Mind-Body Dichotomy

    200. Jim Bo says:


    201. twathater says:

      @ Dave Hansell 11.35am yes Dave something is stuck at the back of my mind too ,from what I can recall it had to do with some rancid paper and hack being fed spurious information from an official source still not investigated or named

      Which could have SERIOUSLY impacted or demonstrated a clear stated contempt for legal principles of due process and equality , the mind boggles (or does it) why a case as significant to equality justice and fairness and also the investigation as to WHO released such details has not received the thorough investigative attention of at least some of the numerous officers assigned to interview 300 or 400 people to charge a man who was cleared of the allegations made against him

      It is indeed perplexing

    202. deerhill says:

      In the heading picture, the man on the right is saying to the 3 men on the left-
      “Did any of you write this letter? If so, why did you not sign it?”

    203. Brian Macfarlane says:

      fuck em all Stu

    204. Brian Macfarlane says:

      fuck em all Stu with nobs on

    205. Willie says:

      Thinking about the Lord Advocate, head of prosecution in Scotland I notice the following from Wikipedia.

      “ On 31 May 2016 the Scottish Government announced that First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had recommended Wolffe to the Scottish Parliament for appointment as Lord Advocate by the Queen.[7] His appointment was confirmed by the Scottish Parliament on 1 June 2016.”

      So the head of the prosecution service that pursued Alex Salmond and is now pursuing Craig Murray and Mark Hirst was appointed at the recommendation of Nicola Sturgeon.

      So does that make James Wolfe a political appointment by the current First Minister. Seems that it does.

      But and who appoints him. Well this legal superman,

    206. Keith fae Leith says:

      Willie, it’s the same case as Lesley Evans, the UK Gov/civil service go through the appointment process til there are 2 candidates, then the FM picks 1.

      Quite often,it seems, that the option is between “Jobby on toast” or “Home made wheat, flour, yeast, eggs, fats, sugar & water baked to a structure able to support & present organic product in an aesthetic manner”

    207. deerhill says:

      More like “Jobby on Toast” or “Toast with a Jobby tastefully placed on top”

    208. Gregor says:


      How can society have public accountability if nothing takes responsibility…

    209. Iain More says:

      If they cant murder us they will bankrupt us.

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top