The Deaf Eyes
This email actually came in a couple of days ago, but we’ve been too dumbstruck to respond to it until now.
Because, like, wow.
Firstly, let’s take a moment to note the weird font change halfway through that central paragraph, as though someone else entirely butted in. Which in a sense they have, as the part in the different font is cut-and-pasted straight from their (unsigned) previous reply to us a month ago, which may or may not have been from “Veronica”.
It really doesn’t sound like they’ve noted all we wrote at all, does it? It sounds like they’ve totally ignored everything we said and just sent us the same reply again.
And let’s also note that those 93 words (of which only 58 were new) took COPFS 27 days to come up with, which makes it all the more shocking that in all that time they haven’t even bothered to read the question.
The letter we sent them on 3 July couldn’t have been any more explicit: we WEREN’T asking them about fraud. We acknowledged fraud was hard to prove. We said, with the starkest clarity, that the issue was embezzlement.
We’re sure they tried really hard to remember that.
But the eventual response is an insult so crassly contemptuous (and therefore entirely in character for the Crown Office, which is answerable to no-one and can do whatever it likes in Scotland) that it’s hard to know what to do about it. Normally officialdom at least vaguely pretends that it cares about accountability to the people that pay its wages, but to be frank it’d have been less offensively dismissive if COPFS had just sent us a dog turd in a jiffy bag.
We’ll let you know where we go from here when we know ourselves.
Interesting that Veronica doesn’t share her surname in an official document.
Probably a bot. The give away is the lack of a surname and given a response I had to a firm online they can give very ‘human’ responses.
Rev, I suggest that your reply keeps it simple – just ask the embezzlement question.
Then they can’t possibly get confused and divert onto the fraud question. Can they?
Sadly, you are banging your head against a brick wall Stu. There is no mechanism available to force the Crown Office to do anything and that is just how they want it. The appointment of the head of said organisation into the Scottish Cabinet reflects just that.
At least you have penned a new article. How long before ‘the regulars’ come on with the ancient history guff and the ‘Colonialism’ tripe that your sane and educated readers have had enough off?
At the risk of repeating myself NOTHING will happen politically in Scotland until the SNP are eradicated. The current wee Mickey Mouse Independence Parties have been formed solely for their office bearers benefit to make them feel important. Prior to the recent General Election in Scotland they really did not see the need to canvass support from the electorate. They preferred to try and make themselves look good in approaching the UN with some spurious claim. How is that going?
In Scotland today it is ALWAYS someone else’s fault. The true Scots (whoever that means) are blameless.
What a mess!
FS! A token comment on the article above then straight into an attack on regular posters and small independence parties. Carrying on with an attack on Salvo and Liberate Scotland then a cursory question about who is Scottish.
Fucking good effort for the third post in. You’re really are a winner, your Mum must love you. FS But who’d be Chas? Miserable bitter Chas…
It could be worse. At least I am not DaveL!
They’ve done a bit of copy & paste from another source, that’s why the text changes. Bizarre to think it’s been careful enough to include other sources and not written in one go, whilst at the same time, completely misses the point.
“Firstly, let’s take a moment to note the weird font change halfway through that central paragraph, as though someone else entirely butted in.”
————————————————
It’s obviously copied and pasted from another document and they forgot to change the font to match.
Yes. And in a short message that took 27 days to emerge and was no doubt reviewed by numerous people in the Department of Stonewalling and Arse-Covering, they still left in a typo “in out earlier response” rather than “in our earlier response.” These people are not as smart as they think they are and will get their comeuppance before long.
Stunning lack of understanding. Or more probably deliberate misunderstanding. And nothing to tell us “Veronica”s status within the “National Enquiry Point”.
Keep up the pressure, but hard to know what to do next, especially in Scotland. Sarah has made a fair suggestion.
How about asking David Davis MP to use HoC privilege to highlight in public the apparent inanity/duplicity being displayed by COPFS?
In The Twelve Tasks of Asterix the Roman bureaucrats who hinder the attempt to get form A38 are eventually foiled by the request for an imaginary form A39. Unable to deal with this request they fob off Asterix with form A38.
Maybe a SAR might disclose who Veronica’s editor is.
It looks to me as though that reply has some copy, cut and paste text in it. Maybe the input of more than one person or bot?
The contempt with which your correspondence is being treated does nothing to inspire any confidence in the impartiality or the conduct of the COPFS. But where there’s a will there’s a way Mr. Campbell and I have no doubt you have the will. Wishing you every success in your continuing efforts to bring the CPFS to account.
AI overview:
You can take action against a decision made by the Procurator Fiscal
If You Are the Victim (A Decision Not to Prosecute)
If the Procurator Fiscal decided to take no action or stop prosecuting your case, you have specific rights under the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014:
• Request an Explanation: You have the right to be told the exact reasons why the case is not going to court. You can request this through the COPFS Enquiry Point or your local office.
• Victims’ Right to Review (VRR): You can formally demand a review of the decision. A completely independent prosecutor who was not involved in your case will re-examine the police reports, witness statements, and evidence.
• How to Apply: You should ideally submit a review request online or via email within 10 working days of being told about the decision to ensure a prompt review.
• The Outcome: If the reviewer finds the original decision was wrong, they can overturn it and instruct the fiscal office to start or restart court proceedings.
Is there a mechanism available to the lieges to compel the COPFS and the Chief Constable to carry out their statutory duties?
If not, we seem to have let ourselves become incredibly vulnerable to people who view their professional role as doing whatever is politically expedient to the ScotGov ahead of the wider public interest.
This isn’t Democracy. We’re being run by a Political Junta propped up by the upper-echelons of the supposed ‘public servants’ who claim to be devoted to ‘public service’ yet overtly treat that same public with complete and utter contempt.
Keep pushing and chipping away. They don’t like a light being shone onto their nefarious activities.
As this rumbles on, folk are waking to the realization that there needs to be a separation between Holyrood and the judiciary in Scotland.
Burnham is making noises about a written constitution for the British state.
He might take as a model that of the Spanish state.
«Section 2»
The Constitution is based on the indissoluble unity of the Spanish Nation, the common and indivisible homeland of all Spaniards; it recognizes and guarantees the right to autonomy of the nationalities and regions of which it is composed and the solidarity among them all.
Advocating secession aka independence is thus an act of treason, bang bang….
A written constitution has not improved the quality of the political class in Spain, the usual problems with ambition, greed, money & power endure.
Written is not what is needed. People to demand better would do.
Learned Hand. A US justice said that liberty lives in the hearts of men and women; if it dies there, no law or court can save it.
Hand also famously said that the-spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right, emphasizing humility and open-mindedness over rigid dogmas in public life.
As it happens, somebody was writing just the other day that individual liberty isn’t possible when the vast majority of citizens have already handed over cradle-to-grave responsibility for their well being to their government.
Seems like a no brainer to me.
Check out the sheeple demanding freedom and liberty. Then in the next breath, when something – anything – is not to their liking, demanding that “the government” should sort it out.
Begging the question: What is your liberty for when you are determined to never use it?
Malfeasance/nonfeasance in public office? (link to duckduckgo.com)
The response is simply a reflection of a gangster state with no functioning rule of law.
The jackboot, the batton, the bullet are manifestations of the same gangster state. A democracy the UK is not.
Fuckin’ ‘ell Guv, that’s a belter. Well worthy of a Kafka award.
Love the cartoon!
Scarier and Scarier that what we have in place for justice cannot understand a simple question, need to consider how not to answer over a number of weeks and requires multiple
contributors to say nothing and the anonymous person with the send button doesn’t know, or can’t be arsed to read over or check for issues such as text format changes.
I feel confident their very high salaries depend on choosing embarrassment over a qualified and justified responce.
Jeeezzo – that response was fairly dripping in condescension. Thanks a lot for that COPFS, much appreciated. 8Ace himself could have written a more helpful response.
Seriously though – this is shocking and as a Scottish taxpayer, I’m deeply unhappy that members of the public, asking legitimate questions, can be dismissed in such a nonchalant manner.
Whatever your next move is Rev, I hope its close to a knockout punch!
The COPFS is correct.
The police found no evidence of either fraud or embezzlement in relation to ‘ring-fenced’ donations to the SNP.
It’s isn’t Police Scotland’s fault, or the fault of the COPFS, if the gullible fell for the SNP’s political promise about how it would spend their money.
Broken promises do not a crime make…
On the contrary – in the case of embezzlement they absolutely do. That’s why Peter Murrell is currently in a prison cell.
You’re referring to a different case.
The question here is whether a trust existed for the SNP ‘ring-fenced’ money.
It didn’t.
In Scots law, embezzlement requires entrustment.
Without entrustment, the offence is impossible.
Changing the subject doesn’t change the law.
On the contrary @Northcode COPFS chose to ignore the simple fact that on EVERY occasion the SNP asked people to donate to, what they themselves continuously referred to as a “Ring Fenced” fund for a 2nd Referendum, they insisted these funds would not be used for anything else and was “Immediately available” when such a Referendum campaign began.
They received monies, totalling almost £670,000 SPECIFICALLY for this fighting fund from SMP members and non-members all of whom wanted to be able to fight for the return of statehood to Scotland.
The SNP’s accounts showed that fund was not there. And more recently John Swinney confirmed these “Dedicated ring fenced funds” had been used for day-to-day expenses.
There is no mystery about the monies, they were misused contrary to their official stated use. That’s a cicil issue and plausibly a criminal issue. COPFS is politicised and clearly should have no official role in the administration. The separation of powers is a fundamental one, and Scotland under the nuSNP no longer functions as a true democracy.
On a lighter note, to my great amusement I received a spam email circular looking into and seeking claimants for mis-sold motor-home finance!!
I’ve barely stopped laughing 🙂
Maybe I’ve just got one of those senses of humour..
Look – just because the SNP government’s legal advisors (and Nicola Sturgeon appointees), Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain (SNP cabinet member) and Solicitor General Ruth Charteris, were heads of the Crown Office when the Crown Office dropped the police’s embezzlement case against the SNP and Nicola Sturgeon, that’s no reason to suspect corruption. Is it?
Do not let them defeat you.
Regarding a written constitution the term unwritten constitution is an oxymoron that has never to my memory been challenged.
Most elected and appointed public officials fear or oppose unassailable rights of the people or limits on their often arbitrary policies.
(When the people fear the government there is tyranny
When the government fears the people there is liberty.)
Thomas Jefferson
What a despicable response , as Knuckle_Heid upthread stated the condescension and contempt is palpable ,the fact that these people feel that they can treat their employers with such contempt illuminates the necessity that come independence restitution will have to be focused in