Ping-Pong-Fiddle-Aye-No
Alert readers will have found it hard not to notice that Wings is currently focused on trying to solve one mystery above all others: why nobody has been prosecuted for a massive theft of hundreds of thousands of pounds, which took place in open sight, beyond any dispute, and is openly admitted by someone who was there at the time.
Until this week, nobody in the two organisations responsible for criminal prosecutions in the country – Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (the Crown Office or COPFS for short) had issued any sort of explanation of why the original Operation Branchform investigation apparently fell by the wayside when it led police to discover a second crime: that of embezzlement against the SNP by its then-Chief Executive, Peter Murrell.
But this week, with very little fanfare, the BBC quietly put out two extended interviews with senior representatives of those organisations, seemingly the unused footage from their half-hour televised documentary “Peter Murrell: The Man With The Money”.
The first was with Police Scotland’s Assistant Chief Constable, Stuart Houston.
The second was with the shadowy figure of John Logue, a Crown Agent at COPFS.
You can watch them in their entirety above, although we don’t particularly recommend it – they’re both pretty dull, and largely concerned with the embezzlement case, about which they provide no dramatic new revelations.
But both also touch on (the lack of) prosecutions over the original complaint. So what happened when the BBC’s Glenn Campbell brought the subject up?
Campbell admirably persists for several minutes, but Houston refuses to be drawn on any sort of answer other than that Police Scotland passed the question on to COPFS for “advice and guidance”, and when given several opportunities to confirm Sturgeon’s claim that she was “completely exonerated” by his force, he steadfastly refuses to say whether the police wanted a prosecution or not.
Now without wishing to be rude to ACC Houston, much of what he says is barely in comprehensible English sentences, so let’s get it down in writing and tidy up all the ums and emms and ehs and see what it looks like.
GLENN CAMPBELL: Why was Nicola Sturgeon not reported for prosecution?
STUART HOUSTON: So again, part of the police investigation we’ve commented upon that Nicola Sturgeon was subject to arrest and interview during the investigation, as was Colin Beattie. The circumstances of those arrests, the information that the police held was all subject of [an] Advice And Guidance Report to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, where it was laid out what their involvement or what their position was in relation to any crime. And –
GC: Did she do anything wrong?
SH: The police, you know, and I suppose for me to say that we report the circumstances to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service [to] allow them to make the decision whether someone is prosecuted. For us, we put in the circumstances to allow them to make an informed decision –
GC: You didn’t recommend prosecution in her case?
SH: We didn’t make any recommendations to prosecute or otherwise, our role is to report the circumstances.
GC: Well, the Crown are very clear that they accepted your recommendation that there was not enough evidence for a prosecution. Is that correct?
SH: So, our our role is to report all the circumstances to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service in relation to everything that’s happened. You know, whether that be any investigation and not necessarily unique to this inquiry. We then seek advice and guidance what way they think that that should go. It is their decision in relation to the prosecution of cases.
GC: Were you happy to leave it at that?
SH: Again, we we act and work in conjunction with the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and we have to do that, and the fact is that we are there to act on their behalf to carry out investigations, and it’s essential that we work together and reach agreement on certain things to make sure how we take things forward, whether about progressing to get warrants etc.
So as I say we report the circumstances and again it is for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to assess that as well and provide any advice and direction.
GC: And just one last thing on that – were you in agreement with the Crown that there was no case to pursue that might lead to a prosecution?
SH: So again, our line was very much “Here is all the evidence that we have collated as much as we could find”. Our job is not to to have that final decision. Our job –
GC: But hang on a minute – in the case of Peter Murrell, you’re sending in a report saying that this guy’s committed a crime and should be prosecuted. I recognize that it was a different type of report that you sent in in relation to Nicola Sturgeon, but therefore can we conclude that you did not think there was the evidence there for her to be prosecuted or for further inquiries to be made?
SH: So I think to to distinguish between the two types of report is in the fact is of Peter Murrell there is a Standard Prosecution Report to say we have carried out an investigation and we can have evidence of certain offenses that we put forward.
An Advice And Guidance Report is that – the word is in it – is the fact is “here’s the circumstances that we’ve uncovered. We’re seeking your advice and guidance on where we go next” and that’s really important, and the fact is in those occasions where there is a circumstance that you need to examine, that’s for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service to give us advice on where we go next.
GC: Would you be happy for that report, that advice and guidance file that you sent into the Crown, to be published?
SH: Again, I think that’s something that we need to be very mindful of the fact is that that is a lot of information. Some of that is sensitive information regarding other individuals. And again, that is a report that is shared between the police and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service –
GC: You’re not saying no.
SH: That wouldn’t be a matter for the police to release that that information.
GC: But would you be comfortable if eventually that was put into the public do?
SH: That [wouldn’t] be a matter for us. We’ve delivered that to the Crown Office and any release of information for that would be a matter for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.
Now, frankly that’s still pretty much just burbling word salad, but one theme does come across loud and clear:
“Not us, guv, you don’t wanna be asking us, ask the Crown Office, it’s all on them. We’re just evidence-gatherers, the Crown Office makes the decisions”.
In that short clip alone, ACC Houston mentions COPFS no fewer than eight times in nine answers. He couldn’t be any clearer where he wants us to look for accountability.
So what happened when Campbell DID go and ask the COPFS man?
John Logue (or as we believe he’s known to all his homies in the ghetto, J-Logue) is a rather more eloquent speaker than DCC Houston. But his theme is remarkably similar to the police officer’s:
“It weren’t me, guv, the police didn’t want to prosecute and we just agreed with them. They decided it. Not us. Them.”
He mentions the police 12 times in his answers, almost all asserting that the police had made a decision – something that we’ve all just watched the police strenuously and categorically deny several times. (Verbatim police quote above: “We didn’t make any recommendations to prosecute or otherwise”.)
Again, here it is in text form:
GLENN CAMPBELL: Why no prosecution of Nicola Sturgeon?
JOHN LOGUE: There was no prosecution because the police came to the conclusion that while they had reported Peter Murrell to us for consideration of prosecution, the police came to the conclusion that before they would submit any report, they would check with us as prosecutors, which is a normal thing that happens in any other case, whether they had enough evidence to prosecute.
And it was clear, I think, to the police that if they had had enough evidence in their eyes to prosecute, then they would have reported Nicola Sturgeon. There would have been no reason not to having reported Peter Murrell. But their investigation in relation to Nicola Sturgeon reached a point where they felt the right thing to do was to check with us as the prosecutors whether there was enough.
And we looked at it and we agreed with their assessment that there was not enough evidence to report Nicola Sturgeon to us for prosecution. And so that police assessment was entirely correct.
GC: As you mentioned, you have a power of direction. Um, did you ask them to go and do more work on her?
JL: So, in looking at that evidence that they had investigated, our conclusion was we couldn’t see any further reasonable lines of inquiry that would allow you to develop and build the case.
So, that was an obvious point that we considered, but our conclusion was there didn’t appear to be anything else that could be done. And therefore the police assessment that they did not have enough to report Nicola Sturgeon to the prosecutor was an appropriate decision.
GC: So that’s not to say there was no evidence but insufficient evidence to develop into a prosecution.
JL: Well, we have to be very careful what we’re talking about when we talk about evidence because when you talk about evidence that doesn’t necessarily mean evidence of someone’s wrongdoing.
It can be evidence particularly in a case like this of the surrounding circumstances of what were the arrangements for the management of the funds within the SNP. Did Nicola Sturgeon have knowledge of how those funds were being used? Didn’t Nicola Sturgeon know that things that were being purchased were being purchased with SNP funds?
So you look at the evidence in the totality and we’re very careful when we say there was insufficient evidence.
That doesn’t mean there is always evidence that you’re looking at because you’re looking at these financial circumstances within an organisation.
But I want to be very clear that people shouldn’t read into that that there’s any sense of a quantity of incriminating evidence, but it just wasn’t enough. That’s not the way we look at it.
We look at the evidence in the round and some evidence can be incriminating, some evidence can be exculpatory. And our job as prosecutors is to look at it in its totality and reach a conclusion about could we persuade a jury to convict someone according to the normal procedures and laws in Scotland.
GC: So in her particular case, you didn’t think she knew what was going on.
JL: We thought the police were correct in their assessment that there was not sufficient evidence to report it to the prosecutor for the question of prosecution.
The reason I’m being quite careful about that is there are important legal differences. So this was not a case where the prosecutor decided not to prosecute having had a report from the police. That’s a very different type of decision and has different legal consequences.
So that’s why I think it’s important given the public interest in the issue to be as clear as possible that this was a case where no report was sent to the prosecutor and our view having looked at what the police had done was that that was the correct thing for the police to do.
GC: Why did it take seven months to reach that decision?
JL: Because of what I’ve explained about the need to look through the type of evidence that I’ve talked about. You’re talking about really complex financial records. Some pieces of evidence had tens of thousands of pages of files with many many lines of transactions.
GC: Not in her case, right?
JL: No, but the evidence was looked at together. We were looking at the question of the evidence against Peter Murrell and at the same time we were considering whether the police had reached the right conclusion in relation to Nicola Sturgeon.
And the other reason I think you’ve got to remember why this took time was the documents didn’t all easily match up. This wasn’t a financial case where you could easily get one set of records, get a second set of records and fit them together and they were a complete match because of what we could show Peter Murrell had done to change and alter the way in which the transactions were being recorded in the SNP. Nothing matched.
And so it takes time then you’ve got to really unpick all the records that are there which have for example reasons against them which turn out not to be true. And so you can’t just easily find a corresponding entry in each system.
GC: So is it reasonable for Nicola Sturgeon to say that she was cleared as a result of all this investigatory work that she was exonerated? Is that reasonable for her to say?
JL: All I can say is that Nicola Sturgeon was not reported to the prosecutor in Scotland by the police for consideration of prosecution. How anyone else chooses to characterize that, I have to leave it to them.
But my view of it is she was not reported to the prosecutor in Scotland for consideration of prosecution because the police took a view on the evidence that had come from their investigation and our view was that that was correct.
GC: Did Nicola Sturgeon fully cooperate with the police and the Crown in their inquiries?
JL: Nicola Sturgeon was interviewed by the police and after the interview provided information through her solicitor.
GC: Was that sufficient — that statement that she gave after her no comment interview?
JL: The statement was an explanation of her position and we were able to take that account into our assessment of the evidence and it didn’t materially change in one way or another the conclusion that we reached.
So what have we just learned? Basically it goes like this:
POLICE SCOTLAND: Here is all our evidence on Nicola Sturgeon. Please give us some advice and guidance on what to do next.
COPFS: We agree with your decision that we shouldn’t prosecute her.
POLICE: But that’s not what we said. We said we didn’t know what to do, and we asked you for advice and guidance.
COPFS: Our advice and guidance is that we agree with you.
POLICE: Agree with what? We asked you a question.
COPFS: Yes, we agree with your decision.
And so on, back and forth, ad infinitum. Ping follows pong follows ping follows pong. Neither man actually makes explicit reference to the disappearing fundraiser money, and Logue in particular keeps subtly trying to steer things back towards the separate crime of Murrell’s embezzlement.
Also, note this passage:
“Did Nicola Sturgeon have knowledge of how those funds were being used? Didn’t Nicola Sturgeon know that things that were being purchased were being purchased with SNP funds?”
That only makes sense with regard to the embezzlement. It is, plainly, ludicrous to suggest that the leader of the SNP wouldn’t know that SNP resources were being spent on what John Swinney described as the “ongoing activities” of the party.
Why, indeed, would anyone even attempt to hide that from her? “SNP spends SNP money on legitimate SNP activities” isn’t any sort of crime.
The problem, of course, and the trigger for there having been an investigation in the first place, was that this money expressly and explicitly WASN’T supposed to be spent on the normal “ongoing activities” of the party.
And in those circumstances it IS a crime. Sturgeon insisted there was no missing money, so she must have known that it had been spent intentionally, even if she didn’t know Murrell had diverted some of it into exotic tableware for her house rather than election leaflets.
So we have incontrovertible evidence of TWO crimes, only one of them dealt with, and the other being one that Sturgeon MUST have been up to her neck in.
But after 75 minutes of video from the two men whose job it was to decide who got prosecuted, we’re still absolutely none the wiser as to why she didn’t face charges, and indeed didn’t even have to face any proper questioning. We haven’t seen the report, and Sturgeon hasn’t produced the list of written answers she sent the police, despite saying she’d be happy to publish it, but it’s up to her lawyer.
Everyone’s batting the ball to everyone else, saying THEY’VE got the answers, and that we all need to stop asking, and that they’ll be making no further comment.
But we promise you this, readers: the questions are never going to stop. And unlike the SNP, we keep our promises.
Although it has stopped raining, I have just put on my hat.
Why? So I can take it off to the Rev.
Stu, I admire your ‘dog with a bone’ tenacity. I simply cannot believe that Scotland is openly sweeping a crime of this magnitude under the carpet. Sturgeon needs to see a dock asap.
She cannot be allowed to swan off into the London sunset while protesting her innocence.
They are in cahoots and Murrell agreed to take 100% of the fall with the likely assurance that he’ll be seen alright once he’s out the pokey.
That’s the main purpose of a multi-layered bureaucracy–to make sure no bureaucrat is ever held responsible for a wrong decision.
Perhaps the BBC should get BOTH Logue and Houston in the same room at the same time and then do a follow-up interview.
“a rather more eloquent speaker”
An whit difference daes it mak?
The Crown Agent used many more grammatically correct complex sentences to say as little as the Deputy Chief Constable. That’s why he’s on a higher pay grade.
Maybe we should have the USA Grand Jury system to decide if there is enough evidence for a prosecution trial. Our legal and police authorities don’t seem to know what to do or are they just incompetent? I wonder what would have happened if the “accused” had been anyone other than the First Minister?
Hello Martin. It is actually the English Grand Jury system that was copied by the Americans. We lost that system when the Monarchy made itself all-powerful.
Sturgeon isn’t a First Minister. COPFS and the Police had no problem investigating and prosecuting a Former FM, Alec Salmond. Who was behind the attempt to discredit and then jail AS?
1st let me say I agree with everything you have written here ,2 wee crawlers doing their best to protect WM best asset to STOP independence , I agree this travesty and complete destruction of justice by these tra itors must continue to be pursued , SCOTS have to wake up and take back control of our country and institutions, thanks for continuing with exposing their LIES & CORRUPTION
This is all very standard these days Rev. When I caught an English High Court judge issuing a forged Court Order under a false and fictitious name the Court Service CEO reply to Sir Teddy Taylor MP was:
“I am told by the High Court that the order to which you refer was sealed on 9 February 1995 and is therefore authentic. The order was actually made by His Honour Judge John Baker and not Sir John Baker”
Try prosecuting “the High Court” and see how far you get!
Sturgeon is an asset of the security services and such, she and many of those around her are immune from consequences.
No prosecutions for the AS stitchup, protected from prosecution from stealing from the SNP, the missing referendum funds. Combine that with her destruction of the SNP and the political activities of the FFM which worked against achieving Scottish independence. Moving to London? I am not there yet but every day that passes without Sturgeon being taken to court brings me closer to accepting that as the most likely reason for the difference in treatment by COPFS of Alec and Nicola Sturgeon. Either that or a woke/extremist liberal cult has taken a grip of all elite positions in the UK and Sturgeon was a cult member!
If my daughter’s school raises funds by asking parents to donate their cash for the purpose of purchasing new books to restock the school library but ultimately spend the cash on new strips for the boy’s football team, then the parents who “gave generously” have been duped.
The the question is, “Was the intention always to purchase football strips?” in which case it was a fraudulent scheme from the outset, and therefore constitutes the Common Law crime of Fraud.
Or, “Was the decision made at a later stage, to simply misappropriate the funds, and spend the cash on something else?” in which case it is a Common Law Theft.
It’s not complicated. The money has undoubtedly been misappropriated. The police know the difference between Fraud and Theft, they never needed any advice from the COPFS.
The issue was always the status of the suspects, and that obviously has skewed how the investigation proceeded.
What we have here is Police Scotland and the Crown Office both failing to act in the public interest.
We know that there’s at least two suspects who, under normal circumstances, would have had their names on the on the front ‘Charge Sheet’ of the police report alongside that of Peter Murrell.
Their charges should have included at the very least, aiding and abetting in the commission of a crime and Common Law Reset.
I’d also have expected consideration, dependent on the evidence, of libeling charges related to False Accounting, Money Laundering and Attempting To Pervert The Course Of Justice.
This whole sorry episode has been a stain not only on Scottish Politics, but also on the Scottish Judiciary System.
Scotland has been made an international laughing stock, and no wonder. The excuses we’re now being asked to accept by professional bodies, who are supposed to always be acting in the ‘public interest’, are just simply too ludicrous to be believed!
Excellent post, Sean Duffy. This is where I am with this affair. ‘We know that there’s at least two suspects who, under normal circumstances, would have had their names on the on the front ‘Charge Sheet’ of the police report alongside that of Peter Murrell.’ The question is why are those people being protected? Sturgeon is no longer in office and COPFS/police were content to prosecute AS. I still suspect the answer lies somewhere between the timing of when the offenses took place(Sturgeon was in office, handing out jobs when AS was prosecuted) and long standing corruption in the COPFS.
… on the other hand Sturgeon Swinney and others may have been in the UK pocket of course, maybe for years before the referendum, directly working for the UK state under some arrangement with its security services. I am still hoping that is not true and that the full details of the political persecution of AS will come out in court.
“What we have here is Police Scotland and the Crown Office both failing to act in the public interest”
Absolutely right Sean and if they think this matter will fizzle out and be forgotten, they need to think again.
Yes, well put, except that there is no legal basis for holding a political party to account for spending funds, donated or otherwise, on things other than the ‘ring-fenced’ promised thing – ie, a referendum in this case. Fight the cases you can win, or more money will be lost, but use this as a means to have the law changed.
You must have mens rea (intent) and that has to be proved via actions, not speculation. If there is/are a written-down documents/s to the effect that donated ‘ring-fenced’ monies would be used, from the offing, for things other than a referendum and the donors were misled deliberately, that would be very hard to prove.
Were the funds used to repay loans given by the Weirs? It seems vey likely. Was it illegal to use those funds for that purpose? If there is no legal requirement for political parties (as opposed to other institutions) to use donated funds for the purpose they were raised, then it cannot be held to be illegal to repay the loans – where the party did have a legal obligation to repay via a contract drawn up when the loans were made. I would think that, only in the event of a referendum and no monies at all being available to fight it, would there be some legal impetus for a case.
That it was very likely that short money from Westminster would have been used to plug that gap in finances to fight a referendum would be very difficult to disprove. It would also be extremely difficult, if not impossible to prove that the SNP never intended to hold another referendum or to ask for one from Westminster. I have said myself – as have others – that the SNP after 2014 never intended to fight another referendum: a) because they are devolutionist to the core; and, b) because, even if one were to be granted, we would lose it again. That, however, is nowhere near the requisite standard of proof necessary.
Does that make what they did wrong? Probably, but not illegal. A class case could, perhaps, be brought in Scots Common Law, but the fact that there is no legal requirement in Scots Law or in English Law or in British Law (shared law) for political parties to use ‘ring-fenced’ funds for their stated purpose – and, remember, no referendum was forthcoming to test either fraud or theft – it would be setting a precedent in all the legal jurisdictions/political arenas to try such a case. ‘Not in the public interest’ would very possibly be the response by the both the legal and political establishments.
In the end, the real culprits are the lacsadaisical lack of oversight, lack of strict rules and the power at the top to overrule oversight when it was pursued. Did that mean that the high heid yins knew that funds had been used for other purposes? Very likely, as they would have had to sign off on it. Does it prove, however, that they deliberately set out to misuse the funds for illegal purposes which they knew to be illegal or questionable? Probably not.
Did that amount to fraud or even theft? Not necessarily, if there was no legal requirement to not do so and the monies had been spent on repayment of the loans which was a legal obligation. To speculate that the high heid yins knew that there was a significant shortfall in monies that could be replaced by short money from Westminster does not show the requisite mens rea (intent) for fraud or theft. It was the lack of strict rules and strict oversight that allowed Murrell to get away with his activities for so long, and his case is very different, although, arguably, both his activities and the lack of donations should have been flagged up very much sooner. I can see a new law (British, and covering the UK as a whole) being introduced soon to close the loophole.
Holy mother of Satan, can anyone have faith in tbe absolute shit show that is police and the prosecution.
Trying to get an answer out of the top cop was just unbelievable. Glen Campbell would have been as good asking for a recital of Ba Ba Black Sheep. No comment, no comment, no comment but without the stare at the wall.
If that is he class of donkey that is a senior police officer lord help the lower ranks. But this not a donkey and like the criminal drug dealer, he knows where the stash is hidden.
If it wasn’t so serious the whole thing would be a comedy. But its not a comedy, and as folks can see here can see, the police and COPFS dont do honesty.
Someone once said to me that tbe police were just another gang. Not so sure if that comment was wrong.
Police Scotland did not send advice & guidance ruling out prosecution or presenting a conclusion , as this option is an active investigative step used regularly . Police Scotland sent 542 pages …they did not seek to drop the case . They were clearly seeking next steps roadmap ..So they were asking is there a sufficiency of evidence ?… Are there further enquiries we need to make to secure a charge .The decision to end the probe rested with COPFS they drew the line not Police Scotland .JL framing of PS referral is highly misleading .
Claire
I wish to heck I could put my hand on the quotation in print but my (admittedly not always perfect) memory is screaming at me that COPFS explained non-pursuance of Sturgeon at the time as of “not being in the public interest”..
Plus the Quality Polis Toshan’s Laissez-faire attitude to recovering the physical and transferable spoils of embezzlement Sturgeon is brazenly clinging onto was quite jaw droppingly staggering.
The two interviewed here reek of public sector “don’t rock the boat”/ “more than my jobs worth” mantra of so many public sector “final salary long service pension prisoners” as I call them who assimilate pdq to last the long haul safely.
The only solution that presents itself is that of a Private Prosecution where Sturgeon’s duplicity, dishonesty and sociopathy will be on full display. All this, despite her best efforts to never make an appearance in a Court of Law where her patent inability to tell the truth will have consequences. I am certain there is a huge public appetite for justice to prevail and to see this monster incarcerated for her crimes.
Hi Rev, you had a second (stalling) answer from the police, but is there any sign of an additional something coming from the COPFS yet?
No.
I recall a higher ranking criminal relation of a friend telling me that his Uncle had got out of the country and clutches of the police but his wife involved to a lesser degree was captured.
He did a deal to return and face a custodial sentence on condition all charges on the wife were dropped.
I wonder if Murrell seeing what an idiot he has been had agreed to take responsibility for everything providing all charges were dropped in respect to his wife.
I don’t agree such deals should be done but they are out there.
Clearly, Mr Logue is used to dealing with those whose heads button up the back. And by that I mean no disrespect to Glenn Campbell who can only deal with what is presented to him.
I see that Dorothy Bain, The head of COFPS at the time, has just resigned.
In the police interview at 26minutes in, the officer says “he was funding a lifestyle that he didn’t think he couldn’t afford on his salary”. It doesn’t fit in with NS saying that they were wealthy people and therefore she wouldn’t have noticed anything unusual with his spending.
Crown office are being disengeneous here. In cases like this the police investigate under the direction of the Crown office. They DO NOT prefer any charges unless instructed by the CO. Murrell would only have been charged after the CO instructed them to do so.Police DO NOT recommend charging or not charging in cases where the investigation is being overseen by CO. That decision lies soley with the CO.
Hands up anyone who agrees with Mr Logue that “we have a system that words” Or is there anyone who accepts that they have successfully “reassured” the public as to the probity of either the police of the Crown office?
When I was young most people had a degree of confidence in many such institutions, including myself. Wee neds from the Drum knew better, and they were right and I was wrong. They keep talking as if that is still the situation but I would not trust any of them to show integrity, as far as I could throw them. And I’m 5ft 2ins and over 70.
There’s more waffle going on here than the freezers in Iceland.
In The Wretched of the Earth, Fanon describes the colonial world as divided into the coloniser’s zone (privileged, protected, policed for order), and the colonised zone (controlled, surveilled, policed for submission).
Within that structure:
1. The police are the immediate face of colonial violence
This is not metaphorical — he’s describing the lived reality of French Algeria.
Fanon’s description of the colonial world might also apply, at least in part, to aspects of public life in Scotland as observed in the seemingly illogical and unjust actions of Police Scotland, the Crown Office, and the Scottish Government.
2. The judiciary enforces colonial legality
Fanon doesn’t say every judge is evil.
He says the legal system itself is built – in Scotland’s case re-built – to preserve the colonial order.
3. Colonial institutions are not “broken”
I don’t believe Scotland’s police and her courts are malfunctioning – they are simply doing the job they were designed to do.
Mind to come back on here, Northy, and tell us as soon as your resistance is criminalised and you’re punished for challenging the system.
Best make that happen as soon as you can.
Until then, readers will naturally assume that you’re pebble dashing the site with high pressure shite.
“…you’re pebble dashing the site with high pressure shite.”
Here we encounter the “Over-Invested Bathroom-Tile Enthusiast” School of Rhetoric.
Only someone who has spent far too long contemplating the tragic fate of pebble-dashed semis would reach for this metaphor.
This is a man who has; stared at a wall, hated the wall, blamed the wall for his life choices.
And now he’s projecting that trauma onto strangers online.
Or, perhaps…
We are witness to the “Metaphor First, Meaning Later (If Ever)” Rhetorical Approach.
This is a classic move.
The writer begins with a colourful image – “high-pressure shite” – and only afterwards remembers they were supposed to be making a point.
It’s like watching someone fire a confetti cannon and then claim it was a tactical strike.
Or, perhaps, and this is my preferred guess…
We see the “I Have No Argument, But I Do Have Imagery” Defence Mechanism.
When someone reaches for; bodily fluids, construction materials, and industrial-grade pressure washers… it’s because they’ve run out of actual ideas.
It’s the rhetorical equivalent of throwing a custard pie when you’ve lost the debate.
You been criminalised yet, Northy?
Seems to me you’re as free as I am to post whatsoever you like. Like everybody else in Scotland, other than when proscribed after due legal process.
Against which you are entirely at liberty to campaign, stand for office, and seek democratic endorsement from Scottish voters. So you can then change things for the better.
As I said, get back to us when you’ve been punished for challenging the system and I’ll willingly concede you’ve won the debate.
Until that happy/joyful day (delete one) please show some respect and acknowledgement for real victims, genuine bravery, true oppression, and those who actually are the wretched of the earth.
And stop self-identifying your petulant foot stamping at being denied your own way as some kind of martyrdom.
“…some kind of martyrdom.”
Now we see the deployment of the:
“I’m Going to Use Three Big Words So You Know I’m Serious” strategy.
Observe the deployment of self-identifying, petulant, and martyrdom.
This is the rhetorical equivalent of wearing a monocle to a fistfight.
It doesn’t help, but it makes the participant feel distinguished.
Man, Northy, but your recent trip to Alpha Centauri hasn’t improved your mood any.
Any word on what punishment is heading your way for challenging the system? I imagine that must be hanging over your head like some sort of metaphorical sword thingy.
Hope you won’t let it spoil your breakfast. Why don’t you laugh in the face of the colonial violence crushing you into submission by having an extra slice of toast? With marmalade?
That’ll learn the cants!
“…your petulant foot stamping…”
Having now examined the specimen in its natural habitat (a social-media thread), we can confidently classify the author as belonging to the rare species:
Homo Commentarius Overcompensatus
Distinguishing features include:
1: A deep belief that a colourful insult is the same thing as a coherent argument.
2: A mating call consisting of elaborate metaphors involving bodily fluids.
3: A territorial instinct triggered by anyone expressing a thought longer than a tweet.
4: A plumage of faux-witty barbs designed to attract upvotes from passing strangers.
This creature thrives in environments rich in anonymity, caffeine, unresolved personal grievances, and the faint hope that someone, somewhere – please, God, anywhere – will think they are hilarious.
Behavioural Notes
When threatened by logic, nuance, or basic literacy, the specimen responds with escalating imagery, increasingly baroque insults, and a sudden inexplicable focus on construction materials.
Scientists believe this fixation stems from early exposure to poorly pebble-dashed council houses, leaving the creature with lifelong architectural trauma.
Loving your use of hyphens there, Northy.
You could never have equaled that writing in Scots.
Plus, of course, nae cant would have had much of a clue what you were wanging oan aboot.
Barely suppressible laughter, thank you!
Wow. Just wow!
Surely the finest, absolute textbook example of self projection, Northy; indeed, as good as you’ll ever see anywhere.
Bravo! Another PB. 🙂
/throws roses appreciatively
For avoidance of misunderstanding: laughter mentioned at 9:19 was thanks to Northcode for comment at 7:50, Saturday, worthy of honorary membership of the Linnean Society.
It was an entertaining diversion from the vexing deviant behaviour exhibited by State officials in Scotland, some having been recorded and broadcast.
Perhaps Houston and Logue actually believe what they are saying but that defies common sense. The most pausible explanation seems to arise from profound corruption which is better explained by Alf Baird’s comments than Homo Commentarius Overcompsentatus’ reliance on personal factors.
Where’s Colin Beattie by the way? Slipped out the back door while no-one’s looking?
The problem with the two interviews is the both the DCC and COFS were talking about the embezzlement case and not the decision not to pursue the fraud case of the misused £600k. The police would be in regular contact with COFS once the investigation started sharing what they had discovered. When the police sought warrants and arrested the three they must have submitted a report against all three with sufficient evidence to justify the searches and the arrests. COFS must have agreed that there was sufficient to have issued the warrants.
It’s all England’s fault.
Cants gubbed Panama 6-1 an a.
Is there no justice under heaven?
That’s what hells for.
The post colonials are running out of text book excuses.
“We’re going to need a bigger boat”
They’re pretending to wave but they really are drowning.
McHateful, ref. your post 7:30 on 27th., if Northcode were able to pose sufficient threat to a scheme pursued by the UK govt then he likely would not have much opportunity to let you know. In assessing the validity of your proposition (at second paragraph) consideration should be given to what happened to Mark Hirst, Craig Murray, Alex Salmond and many others,(could well be Willie McCrea), also to Rev. Stu/Wings. Which legal processes do you think are “due”?
You have shown not only contempt for wretched, oppressed victims (see your own penultimate paragraph), but in effect celebrated the misfortune of part of the semitic population on the Mediterranean coast. You have provided evidence that you are not worthy of Northcode’s nicely composed insults. .
@ Jay says: 28 June, 2026 at 6:18 pm
Ref. my post 7:30 on 27th., there’s a school of thought says the place to respond is under that post. There’s no dispensation for those claiming special needs.
Consideration has been given, particularly in the case of CM. Having assembled what I believed to have been a compelling and persuasive account of the AS fit up, he has now trashed his rep by signing up as a shill for the lassie torturing tunnel scum.
I don’t see the murderous gangsters who have misappropriated billions of their own people’s money to buy weapons and build tunnels, and who started a war that has completely destroyed their own country as “victims”. To me, that would be like describing the German Nazi party as “victims”. That party being motivated, of course, by the exact same virulent poison that infects the ham ass scum – hatred of the Jews.
“not worthy of Northcode’s nicely composed insults”
Well boo fucking hoo. Northy is a rank eejit who self identifies as a millennia-old, space traveling Pict, and who calls for only those fluent and literate in Scots to be allowed jobs in an Independent Scotland.
No sane, rational Scot would allow him anywhere near a serious political movement.
But enough of that. Is Jay your real name? If it is, why did your folks call you after Homer Simpson?
I think we should be told!
There’s a simple explanation which I’ve also cited in relation to a case currently being pursued through the courts by our good friend, Craig Murray. The simple explanation is this: politicians, judges and police are all totally corrupt.
Your good friend, perhaps.
No friend of the tunnel skulking scum whose misogyny, barbarism, hatred, theft and contempt for the very people they claim to lead has brought down utter destruction and destitution on their nation is a friend of mine.
I’m simply assuming that the Police and the Crown Prosecution Office knew they would have to prosecute someone – so the length of time taken was in discussion about extending the enquiry from 2016 back to 2011 so as to muddy the waters where Sturgeon and the huge sums were concerned. I still think there was a lot more money involved. If they had followed the lump sum for the ‘Donated for Independence’ I reckon it goes down a road not taken for prosecution.
“A lot more involved”
Sure. £660k wisely invested for several years might be double that now. Might be ten times that.
Then there’s the little matter of delaying Murrel’s sentencing until after the HR election. An excellent case can be made that the result of that election should be declared null and void and a new election called.
Yes, H McH: actions have consequences – so often not foreseen. Sometimes, it is actually better to let sleeping dogs lie.
Is there a precedent for a Privy Councillor being jailed for fraud? Could be the establishment isn’t too keen on one of its Right Honourables (titter ye not) being banged in the slammer (ouch), lest it start a flood of them joining her.
For a wee while, I’ve been wondering if there was simply an agreement between PM and others in the SNP for PM to be the fall guy. Save the party from a hyper-destructive fraud charge via a ‘lone actor’ embezzlement charge.
unredacted –
from : Dot Bain
to : Swinney
cc : NEC, the gang, the girls, girlboss#1
Look John – the filth are on their way, so “Heads Up” – time to exercise those shredders and zippo lighters.
You need it all cleaner than a priest’s foreskin, more antiseptic than an operating theatre.
– delete this email. And use the discord channel for the details. The online handles to use are from the childrens show that you liked when you were 10.
I will continue to run interference at this end, and what I can’t bounce, I will give warning.
ciao, and kisses.
Thanks for the gift basket, I do like a good fountain pen.
… If
Nikkie is protected by the network of people she gave jobs to (and has dirt on); it is a powerful distortion field which deflects any projectile aimed at her.
NB giving a lot of people jobs and calling in the favours later on, is one theory as to how little joe stalin got the top job after lenin was planted; stalin was never seen as the next leader, more of a useful thug, the enforcer who took out the trash, did the dirty jobs no one wanted … but he once “bizarrely” took a job in the party’s equivalent of recruitment/HR. And he did a lot of favours. Smart guy joe (ran rings round them all at Yalta), and knew that you can’t rob trains forever (however much fun it is).
Stuart, I don’t mean to embarrass you or be a sook but I’ve been a reader of yours since the Amiga Power days. Still have my wee blue book on the shelf.
I just wanted to say thank you, for everything you do. Please never stop. We need people like you.
For Scotland.
“But we promise you this, readers: the questions are never going to stop. And unlike the SNP, we keep our promises.”
Do be careful because the powers that be have a proven record of murdering those who ask such questions.
But not those who write about it on a public forum accessed by millions?
That seems to be the gamble you’re prepared to take.
Rubicon.
Scotland’s team manager,Steve Clarke, has just resigned.
It takes an honourable man to act honourably.
So, don’t expect the resignation of John Swinney any time soon.
C
Very true.
However I don’t think even Swinney went on the election campaign trail with family in tow saying this is a nice holiday experience that they want to enjoy..
I’m certainly no football guru but I can remember major competition international matches back in the day where the head coaches/ managers were up on the sidelines sweating like the fear of god was on them that they’d get the bullet back home unless they got at least some sort of result.
Even many many years ago my late faither was pithy enough to identify the intrinsic underlying problem that persists; the only way they’ll find the goalposts is if it’s surrounded by hair..
Plus in IMO Graeme Souness should be put in front of a firing squad, he was when this stroking the ball in your own half when under zero pressure back, then even further back till back to the goalie gained footage and the footie just has never got out of that malaise, it’s set in stone now from what I saw. Bring back Joe Jordan even if he is about 90 now..
Need to do what equally struggling Scottish rugby did years ago and get foreign sounding accents with Scottish ancestry into the squad or the same old same old is just going to keep replaying again and again..
In my opinion.
I don’t follow football and have never been interested in Scotland football games but I had watched the antics of the Tartan army at this World cup and I have to say their reputation is well deserved.
One thing should be clear from this situation and others (Alex Salmond) is that the British State is controlling Scotland – from the police to Crown Office to major quangos agencies and the civil service. Scots are being crushed while we lose control and Holyrood is just camouflage for this. I suspect at least 15 senior MSPs from all parties are run by London to wreak havoc silently and below the radar. We need patriots to run the country and look after the people. If you don’t believe me check how many senior executives were raised in Scotland…..and those that were are most likely Rangers supporters.
Due to the ‘internal market’ there doesn’t need to be any state sponsored individuals seeking havoc.
The senior positions in most of our institutions are held by people from south of the border who see these are marks on the CV’s to allow them to move onto better jobs.
These individuals are not going to want to rock the boat by taking chances and running the institutions for the benefit of the people of Scotland which might damage future career prospects. Everybody plays safe nowadays.
The same obviously is going to be the same from any Scottish born individuals but we will hardly ever know as they are hardly ever get these posts.
“the British State is controlling Scotland”
Indeed so, and as you imply, colonial institutions are a central feature of control in colonial societies and hence represent one of the ‘determinants’ of independence:
Memmi reminds of this, as follows:
‘Every colonial nation carries the seeds of fascist temptation in its bosom. What is fascism if not a regime of oppression for the benefit of a few? The entire administrative and political machinery of a colony has no other goal. The human relationships have arisen from the severest exploitation, founded on inequality and contempt, guaranteed by police authoritarianism. One should not be too surprised by the fact that institutions depending, after all, on a liberal central government can be so different from those in the mother country. This totalitarian aspect which even democratic regimes take on in their colonies is contradictory in appearance only. Being represented among the colonized by colonialists, they can have no other.’ (Albert Memmi)
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Back in May, I did seriously hope you might learn a new tune for the next 5-year Hollyrood cycle.
More fool me, eh, Alf?
It wouldn’t be quite so bad if you would display the courage of your convictions, form an anti-colonialism party, and stand for office. See if this stuff actually gets any traction with “normal” Scots.
Define policies with a little more depth and nuance than just “decolonise”. Something “normal” Scots could relate to and vote for.
But you won’t do that.
So we have the situation that whilst I’m prepared to be wrong, you’re not prepared to take the risk of not being right.
Sorry, Alf, but that’s how it looks to me.
“form an anti-colonialism party”
Postcolonial theory predicts the political process in a colony always fails the people, Hatey. Which is what we see with a national party that has been co-opted by colonialism and is now disintegrating.
There is no point in creating another political party which will similarly be constrained by the coloniser’s domestic law and state interference.
Which is why the people have to become a liberation movement and their case made subject to international law, as per the strategy adopted by Liberation Scotland:
link to jpti.ch
Enough already, Alf! I get it.
We Scots can’t do anything because we’re pre-ordained to be doomed.
We need others – non-Scots – to do something. Just wait patiently with our hands out and eventually Indy will be gifted to us through the magic of International Law.
Fine. Next HR election: probably May 2031. The months and years are going to fly by.
Excellent comment, Achnababan, which I wholeheartedly agree with. However, I wouldn’t say that there is a significant number of MSPs from each party co-opted by London – it is all of them, due to the set up of the Scottish Parliament. When MSPs are under oath to the English Crown, and the English Crown has a veto over every piece of legislation the parliament proposes, then MSPs are effectively neutralised from acting in Scotland’s best interests. Additionally, their wages are paid by Westminster, so it’s little wonder they’re unable to grasp postcolonial theory:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on him not understanding it.”
Upton Sinclair
“it’s little wonder they’re unable to grasp postcolonial theory”
Of course, you, Alf, Northy, and many others on here all claim to have grasped postcolonial theory. Colonial theory too, no doubt.
Meaning that if you were to run for office yourselves, one of your imaginary reasons why MSPs can’t act in Scotland’s best interests would magically disappear.
You had better quickly come up with an excuse for why that policy is also a non-starter.
Could not concur more with your comments Achnababan. The British state insidiously controls the police, Crown Office,major quango and civil services under the camouflage of supposedly devolved institutions.
The exposure of the extent to which the arms of the state sought to destroy Alex Salmond is testimony to that. Ditto the recent exposures with regard to the Murrell prosecution but not Sturgeon.
As our colonial masters the UK establishment is fighting a dirty war very much hidden below the radar.
I wonder if a Complaint to the Law Society of Scotland might move matters forward:
Rule B1.2: You must be trustworthy and act honestly at all times so that your personal integrity is beyond question. In particular, you must not behave, whether in a professional capacity or otherwise, in a way which is fraudulent or deceitful.
I see that we’re getting some good weather for a change and the climate based hysteria has started up again where this time people are rushing out for air conditioner units to put in their houses which I have no doubt is expensive to buy and expensive to run.
With a bit of common sense, if you need to do anything outdoors you do it in the morning and stay in during the hottest part of the day. When in the house, you draw the curtains which keeps out the sun that drives up indoor temperatures.
This is done in countries that experiences constant and longer high temperatures so why can’t it be done here?
While this time it is primarily economic, this hysteria is being played out in the political sphere with Net Zero which has decimated our oil and gas industry.
Given how easily our population is manipulated by the media to be obsessed over the likes of climate, is it at all surprising that corruption like the Rev is chipping at to get wider exposure is rife?
“Climate change hysteria” you say? “Net zero”…?
Well, that’s lefties for you. The sentiments behind your post are akin to someone kacking their own pants and then complaining to others about the ensuing stench. 🙂
I’ve always seen climate change, in the UK at least, as being nature’s way of preparing the country to better suit the New Brits.
I mean, just look at them. 30 degrees C is a cool, pleasant day for them. And if it gets any hotter, they’re well stocked with tea towels and letter boxes.
Now tell me I’m wrong! 🙂
You really do need to be keeping off the drink CC.
Heh! Well, 8:30am is just a *tad* early, even for me. Mind you, there’s always a Bloody Mary, with plenty of Worcester and a celery stick…. One of my five-a-day.
Is this what you mean?
link to tallbloke.wordpress.com
Thanks for the link Sam.
Even the media are calling out the absurdity of it when the admit in the news that these highest temperatures are coming from airports.
Well, the power efficiency of aircon devices has improved quite a lot in recent years. Given that high temperatures are typically associated with strong sunshine, the trick is to slap some photovoltaic action onto your roof since this will provide most of the energy which will be required by the aircon hardware. Makes sense, doesn’t it? 🙂
That’s a valid point if you’re not living in a flat but given the amount of days we actually get the type of weather here in Scotland to justify requiring aircon, can the cost and subsequent maintenance of having solar on your roof be justified?
If you do your research and think the cost is justified then fair play but if you are scared by the constant doomsaying and get this stuff that you can’t afford then is that right?
Slap some micro-panels on the top of your tinfoil hat and you’ll get enough current to power a personal cooling fan when you’re out and about.
Or recharge your moby.
Reading the above it is almost incomprehensible to see the level of incompetence and buck-passing from these organisations. If this sort of thing happened in the commercial world people would be getting fired left right and the centre. To think that these people keep getting voted into power and are running our country beggars belief. One can only hope that eventually justice is served – but somehow I doubt it.
SCOTLAND….
freed from the opiate of the masses, «sport», a top ranker for corruption along with the porn and drug dealing industries according to the UN.
Rejoice & take a deep cleansing shower.
Ingaland, the inventors of the whole boys’ school latent homoerotic cult is still in….
that figures, seemingly been quite tropical there recently they could grow bananas.
No phallicism intended.
link to fraudadvisorypanel.org
“Common law fraud
Common law fraud is the common‘catch all’ for most fraud prosecutions in Scotland.
Fraud is committed when someoneachieves a result by the means of an intentional false pretence
or dishonest misrepresentation. In other words, where a deliberate deception is used to cause someone to do something they would not otherwise have done. There must be a causal connection between thedeception and the practical result.
The range of false pretences observed in Scottish courts is incredibly wide, from outright lies to implied representations or suggestions of something which was untrue, including silence as to the truth in certain circumstances. An omission can be sufficient if the accused is under a duty to make a representation.
The false pretence must have a ‘practical result’. Any practical result will suffice. There is no minimum requirement of loss for the offence, nor is there any need for the perpetrator to have gained as a consequence.
If the practical result is not achieved
there may be a prosecution forattempted fraud.”
However unpopular it may be with my fellow followers on this site I cannot see a prosecution on the missing ring fenced funds ever reaching a court room. Here are my reasons:
It can be argued (and I expect successfully) that the use of the term “ring-fenced” was done in a loose colloquial sort of way not implying the strict technical sense in which it is used in GAAP and UK FRSs. There was an intent to put the funds by for a future referendum but circumstances intervened and they were used instead to fund elections; a case of events dear boy,events.And John Sweeney has recently admitted this, pointing out that elections are what political parties do.
So the promise was a political promise, like promises to dual the A96 and the A9 or promises over hospital waiting times and so on. No feet are being held to the fire over these unfulfilled promises though poor Fergus Ewing tried to do so and is now out of both Party and Parliament.
And we are dealing here with politicians and broken promises. Politicians I think we can agree are held to lower standards of ethics and probity than other groups in society. Low expectations rule. So good luck with trying to pursue them through the courts.
For me the most depressing aspect of this sorry saga is the unfavorable light which is shone on the people we elect to pursue the noble aim of Scottish independence. People of the calibre of Colin Beattie who assured the world that the missing funds were “woven through” the accounts. With leadership like this there is little hope.
link to scotcourts.gov.uk
You don’t need a fraud case to cause the SNP some fully justified inconvenience…
Be certain you have proof that you donated.
Correspond with the SNP, providing proof of your donation, demanding a full refund whilst outlining your reasons for your demand and giving 30 days to respond/comply.
If they fail to issue a refund, invoke the Simple Procedure linked to above, and tell them you’re doing so.
Simples… literally!
I’ve said many times before. This site is unquestionably the finest investgative journalism provision anywhere in the UK. If only other media outlets took it upon themselves to be as honest and objective, the country would be a better place for us all. My only quibble isn’t with this site, but with the people who vote SNP. Are they unaware, uncaring, complicit, or just stupid? Imagine Independence with the SNP in charge.
“So why was NS not prosecuted?”
A more plausible answer may have been “Because I was instructed by my masters, to back off”. Whispers in the shadows. NS seems to have been a valuable asset, under control, and useful to keep things covered, for now. Is JS also controlled? Would make a lot of sense if so.
This fits with postcolonial theory on how colonialism is enabled and protected, where the national party elite is ‘co-opted by colonialism’ (Fanon), and via ‘the deployment of confidential agents pensioned off at ransom prices’ (Cesaire):
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Whispers in the shadows.
“The swirl of a cape. Masked figures, partially seen in the gloom beneath smashed streetlights.
The sound of running footsteps, fading to nothing. The slam of a distant door, like a stone coffin lid sealing Indy in its forever tomb” (Hatey)
Sorry, I don’t have a book out yet, but I see I have the best part of 5 years to sort that.
We shall keenly await Murrell’s book titled “I Was The Scapegoat; Clearly”.
Tomorrows anniversary of note; Battle of Buittle (near Dalbeattie) in 1308.
Bruce’s fortunes were on the up and the fictional spider in a cave “era” was over.
1308 saw the English supporting (and English supported) opposition being dramatically shown the error of their ways across Scotland.
Balliol stronghold Buittle castle was a centre of this factionalism complete with English manpower under Aymer De Valance. Comyn relatives the McDougalls of Lorna were up for mischief and Edward Bruce caught up with them and crushed these English proxy forces putting, thereafter, Galloway in clear alignment with the Scots throne as opposed to toying with principality status as they had done for years.
An interesting one, once again written completely out of Anglocentric British History..
The references to Scotland’s illustrious history as a Kingdom under a long and noble line of Scottish Kings and Queens written out of recent Indycentric Scottish history too.
Denied and rejected by the socialists and the commoners who would have us believe they are of the same stuff as our great warrior leaders of the past.
Let’s not ignore that one either, eh?
HMcH
Tried to reply earlier, it just didn’t appear, and I know posts at this time upset you so very very much. Like I said, I tried earlier during approved “milk monitor-hours” 🙂
You’ll get this one when matron turns on the Wi-Fi again today at 6.48am so you’ll be fine.
Anyways. Not really understanding where you’re coming from with that comment, perhaps be clearer in future and a bit less sneeringly Smaug-like if you want to be understood..
So unkind, YL.
I’ve merely observed, on several occasions, that your finest work is published after 2 AM.
If you won’t believe it from me, perhaps you should canvas some other opinions.
We are descending down the conspiracy rabbit hole now.]
If you raise something the “british state” doesn’t like you will be murdered.
multiple MSP’s are under “control”
Nicola Surgeon is a “british agent”
and so on.
General independent greed, incompetence and fuck up explain just about anything happening, you don’t need conspiracies, we will be talking about the illuminati deciding scotland cannot be independent next.
Get out in the fresh air a bit more some of you.
How naive.
So the Holyrood spad who was caught with a transponder aerial in his gusset was acting independently. Where did he learn those skills? Why wasn’t he sacked on the spot?
C’mon get aff.
Ah, c’moan noo.
If we all lost our jobs, just because we turned up at work with a transponder aerial in our gusset, there’d be damn few of us left.
But Rob does have a good point about the illuminati. Nobody on Wings BTL has yet considered their influence in keeping Scotland down. That’s long overdue for investigation.
And we have the best part of 5 years …
Illuminati? Very small fry.
Everything leads back to the madness inducing Nyarlathotep, a deity horrible beyond anything you can imagine, and ultimately his master, Azathoth, ‘the blind idiot god, Lord of All Things, encircled by his flopping horde of mindless and amorphous dancers, and lulled by the thin monotonous piping of a demonic flute held in nameless paws’.
Azathoth is asleep and his dreams are our existence – he dreams us into being but if he awakes the world ceases to exist. But Azathoth wants to wake and experience the world which is what Nyarlathotep his ‘son’ is trying to achieve via a portal created with the help of deluded humans such as those in the British State secret services and the SNP.
This is the real conspiracy, the ultimate end point. Anyone who has read the Necronomicon knows this: Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP hierarchy are co-operating with Nyarlathotep to gain immense personal power and immortality but in doing so they are unwittingly enabling the waking of Azathoth and the destruction of the universe.
Prove me wrong.
Your post lacks those tiny but telling details that identify that no matter how ridiculous, exaggerated and simply tonto it is, you actually believe it.
From months (years?) of reading Wings BTL, I’ve become expert at picking up on the signals broadcast by the authentic carpet gnawers. You’re not one.
So no, whilst I could disprove your thesis in a heartbeat, I’m not going to bother.
Judging from the last 30+ years of British politics and the apparent deliberate self-harm continuously inflicted deliberately on the population, I wouldn’t rule out anything to be honest.
However, there does seem to be a core of people who cannot accept that their fellow Scots who stood up to “represent” them in “democracy” are just Darwinian/Trumpian Fuck You All, Every Man For Himself grifters with their hands in the till for every miserable penny their grasping insatiable fingers could lay on.
Careful! You might resurrect the stereotype of the Scots as mean, grasping, penny pinching misers.
Everybody knows there is no truth whatsoever in that stereotype.
Let’s keep it that way.
There are lots of other races/nations/countries in the world where the spouse of the Dear Leader contrives and conspires to amass stashes of stolen Venus razors, super glue and condiment sets.
Lots. No way is it just a Scottish thing.
Can someone answer what the SNP Auditors for all the years of the Peter Murrell embezzlement were doing?
I know they eventually resigned but for years they must have missed embezzlement. Would other auditors care to comment on this – are they an embarrassment to the profession?
David McAdam, Good question but its one of many the rest of us have been asking ourselves.
Is whole fiasco has to be the worst cover up in the history of politics anywhere on this planet.
I’ve never in my life have I seen so many Pinocchio’s acting in one play and the worst of them all is John Swinney.
I take my hat of to Mr Campbell and if it takes given money for him to be successful, just ask.
I have personal experience of criminal corruption by Johnston Carmichael aided by lawyers, sheriffs and civil servants. I have been defrauded of many thousands of pounds. My emails are also diverted so I can’t get this information out there.
The questions that follows is who has the power over the police and COPFS to make them align their stories to justify no prosecution.
Why would such a significant person or body protect a nationalist first minister
There is lies the answer.
“who has the power over the police and COPFS”
This would appear to be the UK ‘interior ministry’ otherwise known as the ‘Home Office’ whose remit includes:
“UK wide elements of policing, that are not devolved
Matters of national security and counter-terrorism
Matters of immigration and border security
Oversight of the Security Service (MI5)”
The current ‘Home Secretary’ is Shabana Mahmood.
I am pleased to know….many will not be sleeping well right now.
Has your readership peaked lately….?
Murrell was the fall guy Sturgeon,Swinney.Beattie .Osawld and the rest of the Corrupt cabal are covering each others backs but keep pursuing them STU the truth will come eventually
They are all under one Colonial State umbrella, “The Scotland Act , including arrangement of votes and voting system.
The police wouldn’t submit a report to COPFS on someone they thought wasn’t guilty of a crime. They would only submit it for someone they were investigating and thought they had enough evidence to convict. It would then be up to COPFS to decide if there was enough evidence or otherwise.
Do the police receive guidance from COPFS on whether to charge someone or not? That’s not a rhetorical question, I don’t know.
I am currently gathering contributions for venezuelan earthquake victims.
– the money will be ring-fenced through my amazon account.
in other news
jude bellingham turned his life around after this – now look at him
link to x.com
– multikulti is the future and it shows the system works
– did lee rigby have the raw pace to unlock packed defences playing a low block; I think not
they all look the same to me
the poor need to eat shit and die, preferably early, like 25 years prematurely (like they do in the east end)
link to bbc.co.uk
“artisanal butter” (anal butter more like it, to look at these two)
and no, they aren’t getting treated in no fucking 2B quid super hospital
– they should also die prematurely and without issue :
link to x.com
– “comes right out with it”
Feminism always was a death cult; the sanctification of infanticide on the altar of personal freedom (but aimed at the darkies, working class, lower orders, the irish … etc) – there never was any “having it all”; it was a con job, a bait and switch for 99% of women, and now it will destroy the west (but who would want to destroy “christendom” … well, thats another question)
NB the way for the SNP to control basic food prices is not to do what they are doing, it is to quietly take a controlling stake in a small local supermarket chain and use its buying power to provide staples at low prices. You can do this on the quiet, relatively cheaply and without making a fuss – but you know, it requires “competence” and not virtue signalling and pride marches; boring cunts with a spreadsheet, all that. Still, I don’t see how you would beat Lidl or Aldi, they are already on the case.
Mental, isn’t it.
Your summary of what is now regarded as “feminism” is indeed accurate. It is a nilhistic misanthropic cult of self-obliteration, as that 2nd X post you linked proves.
some stories of note
sure; whatever you say jack …
link to archive.ph
– just keep the pump and dump going there
scottish lochs are the worlds best natural battery for renewable energy storage
link to archive.ph
– being developed, but not for our benefit; so the real wealth, the leccy goes south
confused nonsense from a brainwashed market ideologue in the tory house rag
link to archive.ph
– still can’t admit privatisation was a disaster and critical infrastructure in private hands is fucking insane … so he soldiers on, trying to square the circle
here is a true market solution; you meter all taps and attach a card reader – you want water, you bid at an auction for the next amount you want – the highest bidder gets the next litre; prices will go up and down. This is a true market solution and no one can argue with it. Peak times will see higher prices, natch. In high demand times, some people will have to go short.
– there will furthermore be different grades of water; a premium water (without shit in it) will be available in selected districts
– next up; compulsory oxygen filters controlled over wifi so the govt can control how much air you are using and to check your co2 emissions; ITS FOR THE NETZERO N THENVIRONMEN
I also propose the roads be sold off; people can put in a bid to own a mini franchise of the road outside your house. Once you win the franchise you can put up a toll and charge what you want; say one toll every hundred yards; will encourage walking and is green etc … roads arent free are you a communist
– can you imagine the surge in our GDP?
all english tories will love these plans – nige and kemi will be fighting over my policies – as no one wants SOSHALISZM, which
CAN NEVER EVER WORk
(except in the world of defence procurement where we call it military keynesianism)
food, energy, water and fucking – is the real politics; lose sight of what is real, you have no future – natural selection will sort you out
“no one wants SOSHALISZM, which CAN NEVER EVER WORk”
You got that bit right. Well done you.
You’ll be one of them that pops up from time to time to say “Look boys, so it cost 100 million lives last time, but this time it really will be different. Promise.”
They always really hate the Jews too.
And they’re always confident, as just one more push is needed to usher in the new utopia, that they’ll be the ones with the cattle prods working the gas chambers, never the gassed.
Just like you.
Call it what you like – a unification, a partnership, a marriage, a merger, a fusion, a joining, an alliance, an invasion, a union or a colony – it makes no difference.
It makes no difference because whatever we call Scotland’s relationship with England, Scotland and the Scots are ruled (badly) by Westminster and its sovereign parliament.
The Scots are ruled over by England and are expected to behave as the ‘civilised’ Anglo behaves (and we all know what that looks like, eh?).
Many Scots, maist likely 1.5 million or roond aboots, seem to be quite happy getting fucked up the arse by a foreign power – probably any foreign power would be fine by them as long as they don’t have to acknowledge thersels as a people in thair ain right, eh?
Thon 1.5 million ‘Scots’, who also call thersels British by the way (because they see the English as their superior – fucking morons), are probably doing alright under England’s boot and tae fuck wi those ither 3 million fowk who actually see thersels as Scottish only, and ken the country they live in haes been cawd Scotland for the past thousand years and not Britain (which is just Ingland cawd anither name).
Northcode,
Your figures cannae be right. 1.5 million Scots are not identifying as British and Scots. It’s not half a million.
Good thing – we are polarising.
National Identity Percentage of Population
Scottish only 65.5%
British only 13.9%
Scottish and British 8.2%
No UK identity 4.4%
The percentage of people identifying as Scottish only has increased from 62.4% to 65.5% since the last census.
The proportion identifying as British only has also risen from 8.4% to 13.9%.
Those who feel both Scottish and British have decreased significantly, indicating a trend towards a more distinct Scottish identity.
Wheesht, sam, what does it matter what the figures are?
Northy’s objective is to establish that anybody disagreeing with his “colony” trope takes it up the arse. And likes it.
I’m sure you’ll agree it’s a ground-breaking new approach to try on the doorsteps. Such a shame Northy never thought it up in April, in time for the May HR election.
We’d still be talking about it now!
My mistake is brilliant news for Scotland.
You have cut the number of eejits identifying as Scottish AND British by a million fowk – good work, Sam.
The actual figure for those Scots who also count themselves British is 445,801 (8.2% – as you tell us – of the total population in Scotland of 5,436,600 at the time of the 2022 census inc non-Scots).
I meant to round it up to 1/2 a million, but had 1.5 million stuck in ma heid and writ thon feegur doun insteid.
So, for clarity, almost half a million idiots identify as both Scottish AND British… which is an impossibility – it’s like saying you are both Scottish AND English.
My personal view that they are all ‘fucking morons’ remains unchanged.
“they are all ‘fucking morons’”
Good Lord, Northy! Back peddling already.
Hardly no time since you were calling them fucking morons who enjoy taking it up the arse!
Jeezo, it’s like not only are you a potty mouthed ignoramus, but you’re a feart, potty mouthed ignoramus.
Which is even worse. I think we can all grudgingly respect somebody who has the courage of their convictions, but somebody who turns and runs? Naw.
Was it me saying you need to try out your ideas on the doorsteps that put the frighteners on you?
Our own Scots in Holyrood seem very willing to fuck us all up the arse, as the Murrills and Co have shown.
With friends like these, who needs enemies.
That’s because, as I have recently explained, those Anglo-Scots absolutely, definitely love being fucked in their arses by their ‘superior’ English masters.
They love it so much they cannot understand why we Scots who identify as Scottish only don’t feel the same way as they do about being fucked up the arse by England.
Fucking morons!
Have you watch Citizen Vigilante?
“we Scots who identify as Scottish only don’t feel the same way”
Sure, Northy.
But you do like to spend a lot of time thinking about it and spend a lot of effort writing about it.
But I’m going to give you the credit on this one. Like some of the other regulars on here, you’ve discovered (re-discovered?) the power of saying that anybody who disagrees with you takes it up the arse.
I’m genuinely interested to discover if that power can be leveraged to deliver Scottish Indy. So fill your boots.
You’ve exhausted every other option, so what choice do you have?
[And I withdraw my earlier accusation that you’re feart to tell decent Scots mothers (and their husbands), to their faces, that they like it up the arse. Just make sure you don’t U-turn again.]
All this crap you spout? Is it because you are not allowed in the girls toilets anymore? Tell us the truth Northy. Did uncle Alf do bad things to you?
link to communitylandscotland.org.uk
“A recent report from the Centre for Local Economies (CLES) puts paid to the idea that there isn’t enough money from onshore wind to go around. The report shows that between 2019 and 2024 Scotland’s onshore wind sector made approximately £5.6 billion in post-tax profits, with £4.1 billion (73%) of that estimated to have been paid in dividends to corporate shareholders. £729 million of that was paid directly to companies owned by private equity or based in tax havens. Scotland’s renewable wealth is being extracted from our economy rather than being recirculated or reinvested in our communities.”
To summarise, using thon foul Inglis tongue we Scots hiv aw been forced tae use, what Sam is saying here is that the Scots are being fucked up the arse by England and its foreign chums.
Would this be the Scots language which is directly descended from Early Middle English?
No – Scots is not descended from Early Middle English.
It’s descended from Northumbrian Old English, which is older than Early Middle English and sits on a different branch of the family tree.
Scots and English are siblings, not parent/child.
Both Scots and English descend from Northumbrian Old English, spoken in the north of England and southeast Scotland before Scotland was Scotland.
This means:
Scots is Anglian, not Southern English.
C3PO @ 2.45
Is that right?
Oh well other than shouldering a share of the UKs national debt (which we didn’t get too much of a say in the decisions that built this edifice to failed empire), will we also not be allowed to use the language in the event of independence just like we couldn’t access sterling, all the money punted into National Insurance, the armed forces (or subdivision of) and the whole tawdry list of “it’s ours Precious”!! spouted by Bitter Together as official English (masquerading as UK) policy?
NC @ 3.13
Correct.
Saxons spoke a Germanic from Saxony/ Holland whereas the Angles spoke a Germanic from Denmark.
C3PO:
Your “mother tongue” therefore is one or other variant of ancient German whereas England and English is a later political construct.
Your welcome.
From Wikipedia page “History of the Scots language”:-
“Northumbrian Old English had been established in south-eastern Scotland as far as the River Forth by the 7th century. It remained largely confined to this area until the 13th century, continuing in common use while Scottish Gaelic was the court language until displaced by Norman French in the early 12th century. English then spread further into Scotland via the burgh.
After the 12th century early northern Middle English began to spread north and eastwards. It was from this dialect that Early Scots, known to its speakers as “English” (Inglis), began to develop, which is why in the late 12th century Adam of Dryburgh described his locality as “in the land of the English in the Kingdom of the Scots”[5] and why the early 13th century author of de Situ Albanie thought that the Firth of Forth “divides the kingdoms of the Scots and of the English”.[6]”
A fascinating history.
YL @ 3:22pm – you won’t get any argument from me against what you’ve raised there (especially the debt share and us having zero say in it – a huge bugbear of mine), and NC’s original summary (minus the weird, irrelevant comment about language) I’m also in agreement with.
“…minus the weird, irrelevant comment about language…”
Okay, so I went a bit LOTR with the ‘foul’ in “…thon foul Inglis tongue we Scots hiv aw been forced tae use…”, but my statement in Scots is substantially accurate – as those who have ever been belted with a tawse as a wean for speaking in Scots will know.
And besides, the use of the Scots language on an independence supporting Scottish blog is hardly weird or irrelevant – or shouldn’t be, anyway.
You must be something other than a Scot.
English, perhaps.
NC @ 6:28pm
Fair enough. I’m too young to have suffered the belt, thankfully that wicked and medieval practice was outlawed in Scottish schools the year I was born.
Been in Scotland all my life, as have most of my MacPherson/Chattan ancestors on both sides going back to at least the 1700s, aside from the odd sprinkling of German and Irish. My missus is English though, which is bound to wind some folk here up. Ironically, her grandparents on one side were MacKenzies from Kiltarlity, which is along the road from where we reside now, the other side was Irish.
As I said, history is fascinating.
Given the importance of ‘cultural assimilation’ in a colonial society, also following the Rev’s remark regarding perceptions of a supposedly “more eloquent speaker”, it is the case that one must make oneself “something other than a Scot”; aye, in oor case ‘English’.
Which always brings us back to the realisation that colonialism involves racism and socio-linguistic prejudice:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Wow, Northy, so all of us are being reamed now.
It’s obviously a fast changing situation. Over the course of today it’s gone from 1.5 million, to 0.5 million, and now to 5.5 million. Some of that 5.5 million must surely be minors, too.
Here’s what I really want to know. Does whatever it is you suffer from have a name yet? Or are you still a medical ground zero, ripe for some eager young psychiatrist to discover and become famous.
“Been in Scotland all my life, as have most of my MacPherson/Chattan ancestors …”
You come from good Scottish stock, Spartan. I have some distant relatives who are MacPhail who I believe were linked in some way to Clan Chattan, although I’m unsure of how they were connected.
Aye, the tawse was brutal. Not too bad if it caught your fingertips, but agony if it ran up the inside of your wrists.
And you’re right, history is fascinating… it tells us who we are and where we come from.
“Wow, Northy, so all of us are being reamed now.”
Yes… correct.
You’re slow to catch on, but you got there eventually.
And now that you’ve reached this milestone in your recovery, the reality of your mind’s colonisation will soon become clear.
Naw, Northy, agreeing that anybody who disagrees with you is a fucking moron (FM) who likes being fucked up the arse (FUTA) is not a milestone in anybody’s recovery.
You made the claim, Northy. Have the cojones to own it.
You revel in claiming the moral high ground. To assert that the Scots are a better people. You bristle theatrically at any perceived slight to Scotland and the Scots.
Yet that’s your freely expressed opinion on the millions of Scots who have the temerity to quibble at your deranged ideas.
Eternal thanks for telling us who you really are.
C3PO @ 5.49
Clan Chattan?
Well if not then you should make yourself familiar with the September 1396 North Inch of Perth “battle of the Clans between ”Clans Chattan and Kay” in front of a Royal Audience.
Your lot won, over some feud or long-standing grudge.
Isn’t life so much more colourful when you research your past as opposed to just dissing it for political reasons?
You’re welcome by the way because it isnae “keech” is it, it’s OUR history..
Good to see you offering due respect with your capitalisation of “Royal Audience”.
As you say, it’s our history. Remove the threads of monarchy that run through it and the entire woven fabric falls to tatters.
I notice you were happy to dismiss the overwhelming evidence of grooming gangs because of some weaknesses with the methodology of the Quilliam foundation, yet you are more than happy here to use a non-peer reviewed study which doesn’t publish its methodology or input data (i.e. exactly the same flaws). The narrative around “huge profits” also does not for example consider where developers have invested in wind farm construction costs in return for equity in the company (rather than debt).
The author claims a “high degree of confidence” in their workings, but doesn’t produce the evidence which could be a straightforward table showing which companies they considered to be SPV’s solely involved in Scottish wind farms. That would allow any errors to be corrected.
The Biggar Economics report (which uses accurate developer data) puts profits at around 6% of income, which is actually quite a low profit rate for a capital intensive activity, with a long lead time.
I’m all for community ownership of small wind developments, but there is no way local community groups are able to bear the risks and (hundreds of millions of pounds) of capital costs associated with large developments.
“I notice you were happy to dismiss the overwhelming evidence of grooming gangs because of some weaknesses with the methodology of the Quilliam foundation, yet you are more than happy here to use a non-peer reviewed study which doesn’t publish its methodology or input data (i.e. exactly the same flaws).”
Ooft. 😀
Taxi for Sam.
Being British.
This disnae mention Norn Iron. I suppose there is just too much deviancy and cover up involved in that. After all it took Dillon a number of books and his mental health to cover at least some of the ground. “The Dirty War”.
Nor is it comprehensive. Good case studies.
link to tandfonline.com
“As demonstrated by the scandals of Hillsborough, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Alder Hey, Post Office, contaminated blood and Grenfell Tower, cover-ups are a feature of Britain’s political landscape. Too frequently, those in positions of trust act against the public interest by covering-up their acts and omissions…
… It appears that those who organise cover-ups are frequently members of the British establishment – privileged actors with shared backgrounds and interests….
…. Cover-ups are a feature of British life, as evidenced by the Hillsborough, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Alder Hey, Post Office, contaminated blood and Grenfell Tower scandals. With the exception of Grenfell, each of these cover-ups featured elements of the British state – the Police, the Post Office and the National Health Service. The Grenfell cover-up featured the Building Research Establishment (BRE), a government laboratory privatised by the Conservatives in 1997. Grenfell Tower was managed by a Tenant Management Organisation on behalf of London’s Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea…
…Institutional defensiveness was a key motivator behind the cover-ups. It exacted a heavy toll on victims, their relatives and guardians. Defensiveness is a latent error – an accident or injustice waiting to happen. The cover-ups featured a paternalistic, indeed contemptuous attitude to victims, their relatives and guardians. It is deeply disturbing that such attitudes prospered in public services such as the NHS and police.”
“was that this money expressly and explicitly WASN’T supposed to be spent on the normal “ongoing activities” of the party.”
Except that’s not quite the case. The small print of the fundraiser pretty much did say it could be spent on whatever.
I know people like me did raise the issue at branch meetings that the headline and small print didn’t match – and specifically stated that it was the sort of thing that could give rise to problems in the future because people’s expectations of what the money should/could be spent on would inevitably differ.
“Except that’s not quite the case. The small print of the fundraiser pretty much did say it could be spent on whatever.”
Which small print specifically? Show us.
The SNP leadership is controlled by MI5. Eventually the truth will be revealed. Keep up the Good work Stu. Without you, were stuffed!!
Posted By: Scottish Financial Review January 30, 2025
Analysis published by the Office of the Chief Economic Advisor has estimated Brexit trade barriers could impact Scotland’s economy by £4 billion.
This estimated economic cost is from the reduction in trade alone – and does not count changes to productivity, investment or migration.
According to the Trade Modelling Report Scottish exports could be lower by 7.2% or £3 billion compared to continued EU membership.
The chemical and pharmaceutical sector is estimated to be one of the hardest hit by post-Brexit trade barriers, with an estimated 9.1% reduction in output, followed by the computer and electronics sector with an estimated 7.7% fall.
The 4.9% output drop estimated for the agrifood sector represents a loss of £827 million.
Any estimate for how much the export market represented by the rest of the world exceeds the export market represented by the EU?
You never were a net contributor to the economy, were you, sam?
If you had been, you might have learned that if you lose one market, you find another. And if that other market is several times bigger than the one you lost, it’s not hard to find.
Cover picture of Commissioner Swinney from Police Academy “Good speech” scene.
“And I.. think.. well let this slide.. speak for ITSSSEELLLLF!!”
🙂
‘MISGENDERING’ BRANDED SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN US UNI POLICY
The University of California (UC) has come under fire for including ‘misgendering’ in its sexual harassment policy.
Under its 43-page Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment Policy, intentionally calling a gender-confused person by their name used before ‘transition’ may be considered as “sexual harassment”.
Campaign group Defending Education (DE) has launched a legal complaint, accusing the University of restricting free speech.
PUNISHING STUDENTS
The UC policy states: “Prohibited Conduct under this Policy includes intentional or repeated use of a name or pronoun inconsistent with the individual’s gender identity (i.e., misgendering).”
In their lawsuit, DE uses the example of students “who voice dissenting opinions on transgender issues, like the belief that someone should ‘use a particular bathroom that does not correspond to their gender identity’”, saying they “can be punished under the Hostile-Environment Provision” of the policy.
It explains: “UC has enacted a speech code that punishes students for engaging in protected speech and discourages them from expressing views outside of the university-approved mainstream.”
‘MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS’
The campaign group explained: “The protection of First Amendment freedoms is nowhere more vital than in American institutions of higher education.
“In fact, the college classroom has been referred to by the U.S. Supreme Court as the ‘marketplace of ideas.’ But marketplaces of ideas wither without open discourse and debate on matters of gender identity and the fixed nature of biological sex.”
It referenced a recent survey of 70,000 college students, showing that roughly half of them felt uncomfortable sharing views on controversial political topics in class or with their peers.
FREE SPEECH
Earlier this year, a Christian teacher in the US was awarded $650,000 after he was forced to resign for refusing to use the ‘preferred names and pronouns’ of gender-confused pupils.
John Kluge had worked as a music teacher at Brownsburg High School, Indiana, for four years when its corporation introduced a policy requiring gender-confused pupils to receive “affirmation of their preferred identity” and warning teachers they could be disciplined for using “the wrong name/pronoun”. Kluge was initially allowed to refer to all pupils by their surnames, but this was later reversed and he resigned in 2018.
Alliance Defending Freedom’s David Cortman, the religious liberty group which supported the case, said: “This settlement confirms what the law has always said: Public schools cannot force teachers to violate their religious beliefs. Title VII requires employers to accommodate their employees’ religious beliefs and practices. When they fail to do so—or worse, announce that they will grant no religious accommodations, as Brownsburg did—they can be held accountable.”
(The Christian Institute, 29 June 2026)
link to christian.org.uk
It’s surely a bit odd that kids might be permitted to change their first names but not their surnames.
Many perfectly normal kids would be only too happy to disown their parents.
“No Morocco, No party!”
========
Fans of Scotland’s erstwhile World Cup group opponents have borrowed the Tartan Army’s signature chant!
Was this an act of cultural appropriation by the Moroccans or cultural colonialism by the Scots?
Gift it to them as reparations for centuries of Scottish colonialism.
And thank our lucky stars we got away lightly.
Hear that crazy rhythm driving me insane….
Spile Milligna was a fortune teller.
Stu,
Those two entities of law certainly tried prosecution on Alex Salmond with less evidence and heresay including the evidence that was not evidence of someone that made a claim that was not even at the appropriate place or time line. To make such an accusation.
So there is no reason to eliminate NS from the investigations, if false aligations are made against AS and taking seriously on time and placement without thorough investigation perhaps they should go over how police evidence is gathered and sent to the Crown office for advice.