J’Accuse 293

A 22 person team from Police Scotland worked for over a year identifying and interviewing almost 400 hoped-for complainants and witnesses against Alex Salmond. This resulted in nil charges and nil witnesses. Nil. The accusations in court were all fabricated and presented on a government platter to the police by a two prong process. The first prong was the civil service witch hunt presided over by Leslie Evans and already condemned by Scotland’s highest civil court as “unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias”. The second prong was the internal SNP process orchestrated by a group at the very top in SNP HQ and the First Minister’s Private Office. A key figure in the latter was directly accused in court by Alex Salmond himself of having encouraged a significant number of the accusers to fabricate incidents.

The only accusations Police Scotland could take forward were given to them by this process. Their long and expensive trawl outside the tiny closed group of accusers revealed nothing. Let me say that again. Police Scotland’s long and expensive trawl outside the tiny closed group of accusers revealed nothing at all.

Let me give you an example. I have personally read an account by a woman who was contacted by the police and asked to give evidence. She was called in for formal interview by the police. The massive police fishing expedition had turned up the fact that, years ago, Alex Salmond had been seen to kiss this woman in the foyer of a theatre. She was asked if she wished to make a complaint of sexual assault against Alex Salmond. The woman was astonished. She told them she remembered the occasion and Alex, who was a friend, had simply kissed her on the cheeks in greeting. No, of course she did not wish to complain. She felt they were trying to push her to do so.

That is typical of hundreds of interviews in the most extensive and expensive fishing expedition in Scottish police history. That turned up nothing. Zilch. Nada.

What the police did get was eye witness evidence that several of the allegations they had been handed by the closed group were fabricated. Two eye witnesses, for example, appeared in court who had been within six feet of the alleged buttock grab during a Stirling Castle photocall. Both had been watching the photo being taken. Both testified nothing had happened. The police had that evidence. But they ignored it. A more startling example is below.

You may be interested to know the police also spent a great deal of time attempting to substantiate the “incident” at Edinburgh airport that has been so frequently recycled by the mainstream media over years. MI5 also hired a London security consultancy to work on this story. The reason so many resouces were expended is that they were desperate to stand up this claim as the only incident from outside the tiny cabal of Scottish government insiders.

They discovered the actual Edinburgh airport “incident” was that Alex Salmond had made a rather excruciating pun about “killer heels” when the footwear of a female member of staff had set off the security scanner gate. This had been reported as a sexist comment in the context of a much wider dispute about staff conditions. That is it. “Killer heels”. A joke. No charge arose from this particular substantial waste of police time, in which the involvement of MI5 is highly noteworthy.

You will probably know that I too faced politically motivated accusations of sexual misconduct from the state, in my case the FCO, when I blew the whistle on British government collusion in torture and extraordinary rendition. I too was eventually cleared of all charges. When you are facing such charges, there comes a moment when you reveal the evidence to those defending you. They, of course, will not necessarily have presumed your innocence. I recount in Murder in Samarkand this moment in my own case, when after going through all the evidence my representative turned to me and said in some astonishment “You really didn’t do any of this, did you?”. He had been disinclined to believe the British government really was trying to fit me up, until he saw the evidence.

In Alex Salmond’s case, after going through all the evidence, his legal team were utterly bemused as to why it was Alex Salmond who was being prosecuted; rather than the members of the WhatsApp group and senders of the other messages, texts and emails being prosecuted for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. There could not be a plainer conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Not only were members of this very small political grouping orchestrating complaints in the documented communications, they were encouraging their creation.

It is much worse than that. There is plain reference to active and incorrect communication from the SNP hierarchy to Police Scotland and the Crown Office.The reason that Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal’s office prosecuted the victim of the conspiracy rather than the conspirators, is that they had themselves been politically hijacked to be part of the fit-up. I fully realise the implications of that statement and I make it with the greatest care. Let me say it again. The reason that Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal’s office prosecuted the victim of the conspiracy rather than the conspirators, is that they had themselves been politically hijacked to be part of the fit-up. Just how profound are the ramifications of this case for the Scottish establishment has so far been appreciated by very few people.

Alex Salmond’s counsel, in his summing up for the defence, said that the evidence of collusion and conspiracy in the case “stinks”. It certainly does; and the stench goes an awful long way. A new unionist online meme today is to ask why the accusers would put themselves at risk of prosecution for perjury. The answer is that there is no such risk; the police and prosecutors, the Scottish government including, but not only, as represented by the accusers, have all been part of the same joint enterprise to stitch up Alex Salmond. That is why there is still no investigation into perjury or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, despite the evidence not just of the trial but of the documents and texts which the judge prevented from being led as “collateral”.

I cannot begin to imagine how evil you have to be to attempt falsely to convict someone of that most vicious, most unforgivable of crimes – rape. But it is impossible to have followed the trial, still more impossible to know the evidence that the judge ruled inadmissible as collateral, without forming the view that this was a deliberate, a most wicked, conspiracy to fit him up on these charges. Furthermore it was a conspiracy that incorporated almost the entire Establishment – a conspiracy that included a corrupt Scottish Government, a corrupt Crown Office, a corrupt Scottish Police and an uniformly corrupt media.

Coverage of the trial was a disgrace. The most salacious accusations of the odious prosecutor were selected and magnified into massive headlines. The defence witnesses were almost totally ignored and unreported. The entire stream of evidence from credible witnesses that disproved the prosecution case in its entirety was simply never presented in the papers, still less on radio and TV. A great deal of that evidence proved that prosecution witnesses were not merely mistaken, but had been deliberately and coldly lying.

Let us consider the lead accusation, that of attempted rape. I want you honestly to consider whether or not this should have been brought before the court.

Woman H claimed that Salmond attempted to rape her after a small dinner with Alex Salmond, an actor (the publication of whose name the court banned), and Ms Samantha Barber, a company director. Salmond gave evidence that the entire story was completely untrue and the woman had not even been there that evening. Samantha Barber gave evidence that she knows woman H well, had been a guest at her wedding reception, and that woman H had phoned and asked her to attend the dinner with the specific explanation she could not be there herself. Indeed, affirmed Ms Barber, woman H definitely was not there. She had given that firm evidence to the police.

Against that, there was a vague statement by the actor that he believed a fourth person had been present, but he described her hair colour as different to woman H, described her as wearing jeans when woman H said she was wearing a dress, and did not say the woman had her arm in a sling – which it was established woman H’s arm was at that time. One arm in a sling would be pretty debilitating in eating and the sort of detail about a fellow diner at a very small dinner party you would likely remember.

Given the very firm statement from Samantha Barber, her friend, that woman H was definitely not there, a number of lawyers and police officers with whom I have discussed this have all been perplexed that the charge was brought at all, with such a strong witness to rebut it, given that the police were relying on an extremely tentative identification from the actor (who did not appear in court to be cross-examined). The truth is, as the jury found, that woman H was not physically there when she said the incident took place. Woman H had lied. More importantly, the evidence available to the police and prosecutor fiscal showed that there was never any realistic prospect of conviction.

So why was the charge brought?

You might also wish to consider this. While the jury was considering its verdict, two members of the jury were removed. Here I know more than I can legally say at present. That might be put together with the chance that somebody was tailing Alex Salmond’s defence counsel and video recording his conversation on a train. If you look at the recording, it is obvious that if it were being taken with a mobile phone, that act of recording would have been very plainly visible to Mr Jackson. It appears far more likely this was done with a concealed device, possibly routed through a mobile phone for purposes of metadata.

I only have definite good source information on MI5 involvement in the attempt to dredge up charges at Edinburgh airport. While I have no direct evidence the juror expulsion or the Jackson tape were underlain by security service surveillance, I am very suspicious given the knowledge that MI5 were engaged in the witch-hunt. Which of course also begs the question that if any of the alleged incidents inside Bute House were true, the state would by now have produced the MI5 or GCHQ/NSA recordings to prove it (claiming they were sourced from elsewhere). Salmond has been considered by them a threat to the UK state for decades, and not only over Scottish Independence.

I also ask you to consider who has been, and who has not been, persecuted. Alex Salmond stood in the dock facing total ruin. The conspirators have faced not even questioning about their collusion.

I have published the only detailed account of the defence case. In consequence not only was I slung out of court by the judge on a motion of the prosecution, and threatened with jail by the Crown Office for contempt of court, the judge also made an order making it illegal to publish the fact that I had been barred from the court, in effect a super injunction. Yet the mainstream media, who published ludicrously selective and salacious extracts from the proceedings designed deliberately to make Salmond appear guilty, have received no threats from the Crown Office. They continue to churn out article after article effectively claiming Salmond is guilty and massively distorting the facts of the case.

One consequence of the extreme media bias is that lies which were told by the prosecution are still being repeated as fact. The lie that a policy and/or practice was put into place to prevent women working alone in the evenings with Alex Salmond, was comprehensively demolished by four separate senior civil service witnesses, one of them a prosecution witness. That was never media reported and the lie is still continually repeated.

It is only the person who published the truth, as agreed by the jury, who faces hostile action from the state.

Because the only thing that was not fixed about this entire affair was the jury. And they may well have contrived to nobble even that with jury expulsion.

We should be very grateful to that jury of solid Edinburgh citizens, two thirds of them female. They were diligent, they did their duty, and they thwarted a great injustice in the midst of a media hanging frenzy that has to have impacted upon them, and probably still does.

I would however state that, up until she inexplicably expelled me from the court, I had found Lady Dorrian’s handling of the trial entirely fair and reasonable. Equally it was a judicial decision in the Court of Session that had found the Scottish Government process against Salmond to be “unlawful, unfair and tainted by apparent bias”.

Which brings me on to the role of the Head of the Scottish Civil Service, Leslie Evans. “We may have lost a battle, but we will win the war”. That is how, in January 2019, Leslie Evans had messaged a colleague the day they lost in the Court of Session. It is an interesting glimpse into the lifestyle of these people that the colleague she messaged was in the Maldives at the time.

It is incredible that after a process Evans claimed in court to have “established” was described as unlawful and unfair by a very senior judge, her first thought was on “winning the war”. That message alone is sufficient to sack Leslie Evans. Is shows that rather than being a civil servant engaged in an effort to administer justly, she was engaged as parti pris in a bitter battle to take down Alex Salmond. She would not even accept the verdict of the Court of Session. It astonishes me, as a former member for six years of the senior civil service myself, that any civil servant could commit themselves in that way to try ruthlessly to take down a former First Minister, with no heed whatsoever either to fair process or to the decision of the courts.

It is quite simply astonishing that Ms Evans has not been sacked.

Well, Leslie Evans did carry on her war. At the cost of many millions to the Scottish taxpayer, she has now lost the battle in both Scotland’s highest civil court and in Scotland’s highest criminal court. The campaign to destroy Salmond has been trounced in both the Court of Session and the High Court. That Leslie Evans is still in post is a national scandal. That Nicola Sturgeon a few weeks ago extended Evans’ tenure by a further two years is an appalling misjudgment.

Evans has a particularly unionist outlook and regards her role as head of the Scottish civil service as equivalent to a departmental permanent secretary of the United Kingdom. Evans spends a great deal of time in London. Unlike her predecessor, who regarded Scotland as separate, Evans regularly attends the weekly “Wednesday Morning Colleagues” (WMC) meeting of Whitehall permanent secretaries, chaired by the Westminster Cabinet Secretary. She much values her position in the UK establishment. What kind of Head of the Scottish Civil Service spends the middle of the week in London?

Rather than any action being taken against the perpetrators of this disgraceful attempt to pervert the course of justice, even after their plot has been roundly rejected in the High Court, the Scottish Government appears to be doubling down in its accusations against Alex Salmond through the medium of the state and corporate media, which is acting in complete unison. It has now been widely briefed against Salmond that Police Scotland has passed a dossier to the Metropolitan Police on four other accusations, set at Westminster.

What the media has not told you is that these accusations are from exactly the same group of conspirators; indeed from some of the actual same accusers. They also do not tell you that these accusations are even weaker than those pursued in Scotland.

In the massive effort to prove “pattern of behaviour” in Alex Salmond’s recent trial, incidents which happened outwith Scottish jurisdiction could be presented as evidence in a separate “docket”. Thus the defence heard evidence from the “Chinese docket” of Salmond “attempting to touch” a colleague’s hair in a hotel lift in China. Well, the London “docket” was considered even weaker than that, so it was not led in the Edinburgh trial. The idea that Leslie Evans’ “war” against Salmond will be won in an English court, having failed in both the civil and criminal Scottish courts, is just black propaganda.

As is the continued campaign to claim that Salmond is really guilty, carried on by Rape Crisis Scotland. They yesterday published a statement by the nine anonymous accusers attacking Salmond further, and rather amusingly the nine wrote together to deny they were associated with each other. It seems to me entirely illegitimate for this group to be able to conduct a continued campaign of political harassment of Alex Salmond from behind the cloak of state-enforced anonymity, after he has been acquitted of all charges. I understand the reasoning behind anonymity for accusers in sex allegations. But surely state backed anonymity should not be used to enable the continued repetition of false accusations without fear of defamation law, after the jury has acquitted? That is perverse.

It is also a fact that Rape Crisis Scotland is just another instrument of the Scottish government, being almost entirely funded by the Scottish government. There is a very serious infringement of public conduct here. One of the nine conspirators, whose statement is being amplified by Rape Crisis Scotland, is personally very directly involved in the channeling of government money to Rape Crisis Scotland. That is a gross abuse of office and conflict of interest and should be a resignation matter. Here again, direct wrongdoing is being carried out from behind the screen of state-backed anonymity.

Let me give you this thought. Alex Salmond having been acquitted, you would think that the unionist media would seek to capitalise by training its guns on those at the head of the SNP who sought to frame him, who after all are still in power. But instead, the unionist media is entirely committed to attacking Salmond, in defiance of all the facts of the case. That shows you who it is the British establishment are really afraid of. It also confirms what I have been saying for years, that the SNP careerist establishment have no genuine interest in Scottish Independence and are not perceived by Whitehall as a threat to the union. And in that judgement at least, Whitehall is right.

I should state that in this article I have, absolutely against my own instincts, deferred to Alex Salmond’s noble but in my view over-generous wish to wait until the Covid-19 virus has passed before giving all the names of those involved and presenting the supporting documents. I have therefore removed several names from this article. Alex Salmond believes that it is wrong to move on this at a time when many people are suffering and grieving, and he has stated that it would indeed be narcissistic to think of his own troubles at this time of wider calamity. I find this extremely upsetting when his enemies are showing absolutely no respect nor restraint whatsoever and are engaged in full-on attack on his reputation. I can assure you this is even more frustrating for me than for you. But while the mills of God grind slowly, they grind exceedingly small.

Those who do not know Scotland are astonished that the Alex Salmond trial and its fallout have not damaged support in the polls for Independence nor even for the SNP. I am not in the least surprised – the reawakening of the national consciousness of the Scottish people is an unstoppable process. If you want to see it, look not at any single politician but at the mass enthusiasm of one of the great, self-organised AUOB marches. The spirit of Independence rides the SNP as the available vehicle to achieve its ends. It is no longer primarily inspired nor controlled by the SNP – indeed the SNP leadership is blatantly trying to dampen it down, with only marginal success. This great movement of a nation is not to be disturbed by fleeting events.

That is not to underplay the importance of events for those caught up in them. As Alex Salmond stood in the dock, he was very probably staring at the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison, of never being with his wife Moira again, and of having his reputation as Scotland’s greatest national leader for centuries erased. The party hierarchy had already overseen the Stalinesque scrubbing of his image and name from all online content under the SNP’s control. The future now looks very different, and I am cheered by the brighter horizon.

Let me finish this article by observing that the British state continues to keep the unconvicted Julian Assange in conditions of appalling detention and receiving brutal personal treatment reserved normally for the most dangerous terrorists. The British state has refused to let Assange out of jail to avert the danger of Covid-19. By contrast the government of Iran has allowed Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe out of prison to reduce her danger from the epidemic. Which of these governments is portrayed as evil by the state and corporate media?

With grateful thanks to those who donated or subscribed to make this reporting possible.

This article is entirely free to reproduce and publish, including in translation, and I very much hope people will do so actively. Truth shall set us free.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]


Account name
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB

Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

293 thoughts on “J’Accuse

1 2 3 4 5
  • Hatuey

    In time we will understand everything and those responsible will be held to account. For now, sadly, we need to wait and be patient. Let them have their fun in the papers, etc. We will quietly watch and take notes.

    One thing that’s unclear in this article but clear in my head; when you consider why Salmond was targeted from elements within the SNP, and when you add to that the motivation of the British state to assist towards destroying him, we might say that it was actually the Scottish independence movement they were unified in attacking.

    It’s the grassroots that always worries them. That’s why they arm and support people like Saddam, Pinochet, Mubarak, etc. The first enemy of any government is its own people. That wasn’t Alex Salmond in the dock. It was the ordinary people of Scotland who, from McCrone to the Vow, have always been the target of their lies and deceptions.

    I’m strangely optimistic about things now. The Scottish people are eye to eye and toe to toe with “the man” and his accomplices, for the first time since 2014.

    Before you defeat your enemies, you must know them. We now have a chance.

    • Cubby


      “Before you defeat your enemies, you must know them.”

      I think they have identified themselves. Get the saboteurs out of the Scotgov/SNP.

      • Hatuey

        We must wait. They know they can overcome all of this by handling the Coronavirus crisis well. We want them to know that and do their best. We will weigh everything up in a few months.

        Politics is a dark business. Politicians are mostly self serving scumbags. Nothing I’ve heard surprises me. It’s routine the world over and always has been.

  • Ian McCubbin

    It is no surprise your account Craig.
    All I can see forwards from this is a stronger cause for Independence, with Alex as a key figure. The underpinning of tge YES Movement and AUOB can challenge the weakened SNP and get the decent MSPs and MPs with us and route out the rot, which must include paid staff and civil servants.
    After Covid a cleansing is needed.

    • Chris in Oz

      ‘After COVID’ will be too late. One of the weaknesses of the progressive left (and, in my semi-ignorance, I place the Scottish independence movement in that camp) is that they always follow supposedly universal rules of politeness and civility in the pursuit of their noble ends.

      Unfortunately, the other side (neoliberals, rent-seekers, empire loyalists, oligarchs, plutocrats) are never constrained by any such niceties. These people see the current crisis as just another opportunity for further self-enrichment. Branson wants a bail-out, UK private hospitals are getting an NHS funded subsidy to see them through lean times, US private equity firms are looking for businesses under pressure that they can bleed dry.

      By the time the COVID crisis is over, the world will have (been) changed. If the Independence movement sits on its hand until it’s all over, their goals will be much harder to achieve, if not impossibly so (sorry Alex).

      The time to push for independence is ‘now’. The time for revolution is always ‘now’. Any delay for strategic reasons begs the question of whose strategy you wish to follow.

      [Disclaimer: From my quiet corner of the globe, I could not be further geographically or politically from Scotland’s challenges. Feel free to treat my advice with the the disdain you feel it warrants.]

      • Hatuey

        That all sounds great on paper to me, but how do you think it would sound in the minds of the 90% of society whose lives revolve around more mundane things like breathing and eating?

        There are certain situations where you just need to shut it. This is one of them.

  • Tony M

    Epic post Craig. I knew it was bad, am only now now comprehending just how much it is so.

    The rot cannot have contaminated all of the institutions of the nation, I hope many will just have been keeping their heads down, have bided their time, know more than they can contain and time has come when very real harm is resulting from continuing to stand aside, it’s no longer, never was a game. Our power is in our numbers, we must shun and pillory those who do Scotland down, they are shameful but have no shame. No one now can with hand on heart stand by passively. I’m no spring-chicken but have never known such dark times, fighting the state daily in a personal matter, a nightmare that has engulfed myself and one most dear to me, and separately to vanquish the evils within and without, that beset Scotland and the Scots. They’ve over-reached themselves, our enemies, there’s no way back from this for them, they’re out on a limb, and its a long way to the unyielding ground below. It’s always darkest just before dawn.

    Please excuse my lighter-hearted posts and asides, no offence is intended, nor to lower the tone or downplay the seriousness of the grave matters discussed. I’m no troll, I’m simply must at times try to find solace in a rather grim, slightly surreal humour, that sometimes finds its way into comments that are otherwise germane to the discussion. Think it impossible for me I think for anyone, to be utterly serious all the time. Laughter is a beautiful sound and the best medicine, laughter at those who oppose our independence, better still, for they’re on a losing streak now, we know it, they’ll know it soon enough if they don’t already.

  • Yalt

    “That Leslie Evans is still in post is a national scandal. That Nicola Sturgeon a few weeks ago extended Evans’ tenure by a further two years is an appalling misjudgment.”

    Am I right to assume that this last sentence is a deliberate piece of irony? It’s a testament to Craig’s wonderfully droll sense of humor (and never more so than when he’s livid) that I can’t always tell.

    • Joan Savage

      I suspect that Lesley Evans’ fate will be decided by the outcome of the investigation into the handling of the complaint against Mr Salmond by the Scottish Government. It might be the case that sacking her before this process is complete would trigger Wrongful Dismissal proceedings and the extension to her contract is a holding device. I hope so at any rate.

      I have only one other issue to question in relation to Craig’s Tour de Force article. This refers to his comments about Rape Crisis. As a senior officer in a local authority I was responsible for disbursing funds to voluntary organisations such as Rape Crisis. The organisation got direct funding from Councils as well as, if Craig is correct, from the Scottish Government. It is not my view, from my experience of negotiating at branch level that Rape Crisis would deliberately collude with British State machinations.

      My experience is that Rape Crisis has a zealot-like, totalitarian approach to rape accusations. Without exception, and on the basis of no evidence whatsoever if none is presented, believe the accuser. Indeed they believe the accuser even if evidence to the contrary is presented. Their support for the accuser is, in my experience, unconditional. I personally felt uncomfortable with a policy that was pre-Enlightenment in nature and akin to witch burning on the basis of trial by denunciation. At the time, however, the policy had some justification as historically the police always took the opposite view.

      I felt and still do, that genuine victims are not honoured by this approach. As an entire society, however, we appear to have regressed to pre Enlightenment days. Currently, self-identification is all and Reason is traduced. This applies to biological reality as well as evidence in terms of accusations of sexual abuse. The unconditional hashtag ‘# I believe her’ tells its own story. I suspect that Rape Crisis’s position is genuinely if erroneously held, and that it is naively being exploited by a range of forces hostile to Mr Salmond, from the BBC to the mendacious cabal itself. Of course the opportunity also elevates Rape Crisis to a position of prominence, clearly a seductive position for them.

  • Janette Dickie

    Thank you for this article which throws light not only on the injustices faced by Alex Sallmond and yourself but also on the corruption at the top of the SNP and indeed the Scottish Government as well as the too comfortable SNP Mps at Westminster. Alarm bells rang for me when, immediately after the 2014 referendum ‘defeat Maori Black was reported on TV news to say she hoped for another referendum in her lifetime!!! Eh, shurely shome mishtake…?! It was then I knew that we had a battle on our hands, in the absence of Alex, to achieve our goal of Independent nation and that the machine of SNP MPs and SMPs would present the primary hurdle to achieving Scotia’s liberation. I have always been inspired by Alex’s intellect and articulate analysis, something lacking in the present SNP leadership. We, the people of Scotland are behind you both, stay strong and keep going. I shall be cancelling my membership and subscription to SNP forthwith. You have my support.

  • Brianfujisan

    When I boot up the Computer.. The first two sites I go to are ‘ The Wee Ginger Dug ‘ and here at Craig’s..
    Them my eyes get tired reading the post, and all the comments.

    So after reading Craig’s Outstanding post ‘ J’Accuse ‘ I had a shifty on Fbook..to find that all the indy sites are sharing Craig’s account of 30th March…Like wildfire.. and so they should

    BAD MOVE by the National to publish the Alphabet Sisters Letter on Sunday ( 29th March ) … WTF.

    • Cubby


      Brian it was correct that the National reported on the letter by the alphabet sisters. The way it was done was a mistake. They could of course rectify the mistake by publish Craig’s J’Accuse article to provide a better balance in their reporting.

  • John Keith

    Did I subscribe to your defence fund? I can’t remember.
    It would be a ‘one-off’ sub. no way can I do a DD.
    I rather worry that you may need it.

  • John Thatcher

    This is absolutely scandalous,and the evidence of a pattern of behaviour by the British establishment to destroy those they regard as the enemy is truly both frightening and disgusting.

  • David

    Very grateful to you for all the hard work you put into this.
    Peter de Vink circulated a copy of a letter he had sent to The Scotsman on Saturday re the need to remove the Head of the Scottish Civil Service from her post for her complicity in the prosecution. He was very doubtful of its ever being published.

  • Rhisiart Gwilym

    Very well said, Craig. Keep sluggin’, good patriotic Scot! For me, as for – I conjecture – millions of others, you are one of the most reliably-persistent candles in the darkness. Scotland will be free! And Cymru after it, I dream!

  • Dom

    Our political and media elite do share the same ideology and don’t find it remotely dull.

  • Penguin

    Some desperate people are claiming that since Saint Sturgeon of Dreghorn was going to appear as a Witness for the Defence, she couldn’t possibly have been attempting to destroy Alex Salmond.

    Alex Bell was called as a Witness for the Defence. There is nobody outside of jill stephenson and her coven who still claims that he is anything other than an enemy of Scotland, and a man who has been trying to destroy Salmond every single day since he was sacked.

    As the yoons used to say. Nicky knew. Except they had it backwards. She didn’t know he salmond was a rapist as their sick fantasies had it, rather she knew he wasn’t and used the Office of the First Minister of Scotland to frame an innocent man.

    • Giyane


      Sticking my neck out and pulling my collar down for the axe to get a clean strike, Sturgeon might be as completely powerless against the machinations of our deep state as Craig. After all The wonk’s plan is weak, divide and rule. So don’t be divided and ruled .

      The only tool that could be brought against these dark forces that think they are above the law is the Law itself. It has been brought in front of the jury and kicked out. Nobody can prove that a politician playing the political game necessarily condones the skulduggery that is going on. In fact to make that judgement against Sturgeon might be as dangerous as people making the judgement of sleaziness against Salmond.


  • Les Wilson

    Well the yoonionist fractions are attacking you today for these comments Craig, it shows to me that you have hit the button squarely.
    A concentrated balyhoo that does not dent your comments in anyway. The deep state and it’s proxies did not care one little bit, about making things up, lying, feeding the anti Salmond agenda they have to the press. Worst of all this though is people will now see that the upper cliche of the SNP were deeply involved with all of this.

    Yet, they must also feel that in some delusion, that they can continue with the situation they, at the very least, helped willingly to orchestrate. When he feels it is time, Alex will blow all of this into the open. Then the Scottish people themselves will see just how this came about, and may be astonished over who was actually involved. The public opinion those seek to get, will burst like a wet ballon over their head, there will be a culling of these people, who feel they are untouchable within the Scottish Government, and to, with the State actors involved.

    Scotland and not least Alex Salmond deserves better than this, it is shameful, yet the conspirators do not seem so, a campaign of trying to make something work for them is still going on, with of course the willing participants in the press and the wider media. Well I hope the slip up as badly as they did in the main event. Scotland will be watching all of this, and just how all the conspirators are working together, to further harm an proven innocent man. All of that is truly shameful, but they have picked the wrong man.

    Thanks for your detailed report here Craig, lang may your lum reek, as they say.

    • Deepgreenpuddock

      have you a link to comment about yesterdays post?If it has attracted attention then I would call that a success.

  • Scozzie

    What a truly disturbing read, the level of corruption across our Scottish Government, SNP hierarchy, Police and Crown Office makes me sick to the stomach! What a bare face cheek we have to criticise other countries in their levels of corruption. And for what? To take down a man, with an exemplary 30 year political career and a desire to see his country independent.
    Our country is run by cockroaches, who conspire with other cockroaches, and treat us all as nothing more than maggots.

    We as a people should demand total integrity and transparency of our institutions – nothing less. This whole court case has made a mockery of the Scottish people and those corruptors should be held to account, by the people, as it seems our institutions cannot hold them to account as they’re part of the problem.

    If the SNP / Scottish Government cannot clean up its act (which I personally doubt) as they’re already too compromised; then we need a new independence party and dare I say pretty fast.

    As for Alex Salmond, I hope he lets rip! I’m reminded by my favourite boxer Joe Frazer who once said: “I wasn’t a big guy. People thought the big guys would eat me up. But it was the other way around, I loved fighting the big guys”. Alex – take on the big guys, the independence movement has your back. I hope he does expose the full truth of this conspiracy and those perpetrators have no where to hide (not even behind a Sesame Street alphabet!!!).

  • Giovanni Gentles

    It’s no surprise that BBC Scotland has effectively ceased at this time under the guise of coronavirus.
    Full on UK control without even trying to pretend they care about Scotland, not that they did a good job of pretending before.

    • Hetty

      This is about the British establishment, and about the ‘government’ in England conspiring to create divide within the SNP, in order to take down the party or certainly at least to disempower them, in order to thwart the independence movement in total.

      I agree with Giyane @12.33 that Nicola Sturgeon may be out of her depth with regard to all of the ‘machinations of the deep state’ of the British Nationalist state. She is not daft, but she has to tread carefully, these people are nasty, and powerful. It’s like those old films where the one genuine person in an organisation is being watched and played by some moles at the top.

      I think Nicola Sturgeon has been played like a fiiddle and she will damn well know that. How she deals with it now or in the future I don’t know. What would anyone do in such a predicament, your every move, everything you say, being noted by the enemy within. Tread carefully until you can get rid of them. At least that is how I view it. I also agree with a comment here about it being Scotland in the dock, and in particular anyone genuinely wanting and working for independence for Scotland.

      Those women who basically lied in court, have done no end of harm to real victims of rape and sexual abuse. They should hang their lying heads in shame they really should.

  • Crispa

    Very powerful post. Can’t help but cite this historical analogy (c1591) from actions of demonologist, James VI (James I of England).
    “(Barbara Napier) was indicted for ‘many treasonable conspiracies undertaken by witchcraft to have destroyed the King’s person by a picture of wax…and for drowning a boat between Leigh and Kinghorne, wherein sixty persons were lost’. But when the accusations were heard, the jury at the Edinburgh assizes dismissed the case.
    James was furious. He charged the jury with ‘wilful error on assize, acquitting a witch’.
    “The thing that moved [the jury] to find as they did, was because they had no testimony but of witches; which they thought not sufficient …..yet in these matters of witchcraft good reason that such be admitted. First, none honest can know these matters. Second, because they will not accuse themselves. Thirdly, because no act which is done by them can be seen”.
    The aftermath is also something to be wary about. “ The jury agreed to ‘yield themselves to the King’s will’. Barbara Napier was duly sentenced, but pleaded pregnancy. Later, ‘nobody insisting in the pursuit of her, she was set at liberty’.”

    Cawthorne, Nigel. Witch Hunt: The History of a Persecution . Arcturus Publishing. Kindle Edition.

    • Soothmoother

      Her husband was Archibald Douglas who was a descendant of the Douglas of Drumlanrig family (Coshogle branch). Her connections probably saved her.

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    A “close ally of Sturgeon” tells the Guardian; “Is this going to bring the first minister down? No, it’s not. I don’t see that they’ve got a mechanism to do that. It’s not great, but we will get through this.”
    So that’s it, they ain’t going anywhere and there’s nothing in the rule book that facilitates the removal of Sturgeon and Murrell. We’re going to have to burn the house down to be rid of these treacherous parasites.

    • Deepgreenpuddock

      Surely if a first minister loses all credibility in her integrity, she would have no choice but to resign.There IS a process and it involves political judgement and resignation. Hanging on with a huge cloud of noxious gas around her would be intolerable and would mean a complete breakdown at the polls for the party.

      • Doug Scorgie

        March 31, 2020 at 13:01

        ” Hanging on with a huge cloud of noxious gas around her would be intolerable and would mean a complete breakdown at the polls for the party.”

        That could be the idea.

        • Deepgreenpuddock

          Well yes it could, but after the ludicrous doings of the trial, do you seriously think they are that clever.Besides even if the SNP implodes I think the independence movement would not and indeed might be all the stronger for a shake out of the careerists in cahoots with some unseen influemces.

    • nevermind

      If people resign from the party in protest and it gets public, MSPs will get rid of her one way or other. The moment they fear not getting elected anymore, they come out and ‘speak up for Independence’, asking for a Scottish strawpoll or referendum on the issue, regardless of Westmonster.

    • Kate

      We actually do have a mechanism. It’s called voting. If the election 2021 goes ahead, we do not vote SNP but for a new party IF THERE IS ONE. Until then, yes… we have no control. But they can’t put an election off forever.

  • J Galt

    With respect to Craig and the importance of the matter at hand this is probably a discussion we should have elsewhere.

    However you are right to draw attention to this important information. Many brave medical professionals – particularly in Germany – are speaking out. What is happening is astonishing.

    Back to the topic at hand, I don’t think I’ve ever read a more riveting piece of political journalism.

  • Ottomanboi

    The manner and speed with which self-styled democratic governments have moved into totalitarian mode over the alleged threat of SARS CoV-2 is instructive and will no doubt propagate a forest of literature for years to come.
    Truly, to fear is to obey.
    The Salmond affair is evidence of how many of us have the requisite temperament to provide the means for authoritarian, anti-democratic systems to function.
    Scots, be on your guard.

    • Deepgreenpuddock

      Is it really indefinite? How would you feel about having no choice about serving in a jury at the moment.Obviously the current conditions are not conducive to business as usual but I have no sense that there is a slide into totalitarianism. The very fact that the police have been criticised both externally and internally over heavy handed treatment of the walking public suggest quite the reverse.

      • Steve Hayes

        Deepgreenpuddock. The suspension of parliament is officially until the 21st of April. However, it was made perfectly clear that parliament will only resume if it is deemed appropriate to do so. So, yes the suspension is indefinite. And I must say, you seem remarkably relaxed about the abrogation of our rights and liberties and the establishment of a totalitarian police state.

        • Deepgreenpuddock

          Of course I see the danger but I just think that there would be a groundswell of protest. I can’t imagine the people of this country accepting such a state of affairs.In that event even I would be impelled to let my dissent known.
          I also realise there is a substantial right wing extremist element within parliament but they are mostly of that contrarian breed of libertarianism and I can’t see them forming a coherent movement to usurp parliament.?Rees Mogg/lord snooty/Beano?????Mark Francois+Chris Grayling (the chuckle brothers )Nadine Dorries !!!!!These are not men of mettle
          A mixture of loonies, narcissists and dunderheads.
          I also think these people are career opportunists who would not risk their state sinecures and opportunities to preen and (im)posture

        • CJ

          You’re right. Little by little is how it happens. Truly astonishing many cannot see the severity of what is happening. Nothing is temporary in politics it is simply to gain acceptance by an overworked could not give a hoot public. Behind the lines.

  • Deepgreenpuddock

    You clearly know little about modelling an epidemic and even less about Mad Cow disease or B?SE. It’s OK not to know stuff but not good to spout off uninformed twaddle.

  • Siusaidh NicNeill

    I speak as a woman who has undergone a very violent sexual assault. Nothing that these women’s representatives said in the media made me think that this would come to anything. It was ridiculously infantile. I support the MeToo campaign but would now question the support given to such contrary, puerile and lying accusations, which will surely set the MeToo campaign back decades, or should. I have always, always been a strong believer that if women’s identities are kept incognito then so should the man’s. The argument that more women might come forward is contrary to human justice, in that the accused has already been found guilty, merely by being accused.

    • James

      Actually – bringing Alex Salmond’s name forward – and ending up with absolutely nothing other than the original accusations by the alphabet sisters – did give strong evidence of the innocence of A.S.. So, if used properly, bringing forward the name of the accused isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It can help to establish innocence, because it seems to be standard that people guilty of the sort of thing A.S. was accused of tend to be serial offenders – it is rarely a `one off’.

      The amazing thing is that, having obtained so little, they brought the case to trial anyway. Craig Murray’s article gives good insights into why this happened.

    • Deepgreenpuddock

      I think there is a genuine debate to be held about sexual politics. There isn’t much doubt that generations of men have adopted the habits of the past and been abusive to their spouses and even childre.In my lifetime(ok I am getting on) men were often tyrants within the home. The model of man woman relations was one of domination and coercian of the women who had to do much of the work of the family.In the past, it was impossible for the police to act on suspicions of severe sexual abuse of chilfdren because the authority of the ‘man’ of the house was unchallengeable.It has taken many decades to shift this long entrenched set of values. The sixties, while far from great, at least moved the ‘sexual goalposts” enough to see the huge hypocrisy and dishonesty that dominated and inhibited and shrouded debate around sexuality ,and social conditions.
      As a result of this turgid stasis and poisoning of conventional human relations due to the domination by economic oppression and residual archaisms, women have developed a disposition towards men(not without reason)that is untrustinf and abrasive.
      Parallle to all this change there has also been a relaxation over the last 50 years of the definition of what is regarded now as mainstream expression of sexuality.In other words the various challenges to deeply ingrained prejudices regarding homosexuality and more recently the relaxation of social mores around transsexuality made more acute by the potential for intervention in gender(sexual ) identity over the last twenty years.
      Even more lately there has been a challenge to the predatory sexuality typified by Weinstein, and commonly adopted since the sexual revolution(largely attributable to the contraceptive pill) of the sixties, and giving rise to the ‘Metoo’ movement.
      One senses that the Alex Salmond trial has occurred within the context of politically active women and their wish to challenge sexual attitudes where they perceive that (mostly)men abuse power(political or economic) to
      get sexual favours. For instance Clinton was clearly abusing his power with Monica Lewinsky.Financial and/or political power has been a strong inducement for many people (of both sexes)to succumb to the sexual advances of men(or women).
      Of course we cannot surmise the underlying attitudes of AS. Was he a player as has been hinted at.Have the women complainants made hugely exaggerated claims in an attempt put someone ‘in their place’?It looks rather as if AS’ behaviour was not ouside the norms of current times and it looks as if the political connivings of the women has been allowed to get out of control, driven by both the current ‘metoo’ movement groundswell of discontent, and petty political career grievances. It is inescapeable that the integrity of those involved has ben shot to pieces by their own actions

  • Cubby

    Does the alphabet sister who got cold feet and pulled out at the last minute still have legal anonymity. If you do not go ahead with your charge do you still get to remain anonymous. Any legal eagle know? If you do still have legal protection it means you can make an accusation let it stew for a while and then not bother going to court after having trashed someone’s name.

    I noticed that this sister was not listed on the noxious letter the others issued at the weekend. Has she been cast in to the wilderness by the rest of them and Rape Crisis Scotland who are creating their very own crisis for their organisation.

    Someone should point out to the woman who was on the TV that actually no rape took place.

  • iain

    This attempted sexual stitch up bears the hallmark of British Intelligence. Let’s not forget the heads of MI5 and MI6, Alex Younger and Ken McCallum, are both products of ancient Scottish universities.

  • Los

    Here we go: From the Guardian:

    “Scottish lawyers have attacked plans to suspend jury trials in Scotland as part of sweeping measures to cope with the coronavirus crisis, describing the proposals as “premature, disproportionate and ill-advised.”

    The Scottish government is pushing through a swathe of emergency powers in a new bill expected to be approved in a single day by MSPs tomorrow, which will include banning landlords from evicting tenants who cannot afford rent and extending detention times for people with mental illnesses.

    Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, said the jury trial measures were necessary to ensure that serious criminal trials did not halt entirely because juries were unable to sit during the crisis. She insisted they were essential given the seriousness of the crisis.”


    Now why would they possibly want to do that ?

    • nevermind

      Time for Salmond to press charges in courts who are not fagged by politician via hastily drawn up emergency laws. Be it in Ireland or the Hague.

  • Tony M

    Sturgeon’s continuing silence suggests guilt by action or inaction in this sickening affair. The matter is no longer sub judice, the political aspects of it were not, could never be if the pretence, never mind the actuality of democracy is to be maintained. Nicola Sturgeon’s ascendance to the First Minister’s job required that Salmond was got out of the way, but the man is fortunately irrepressible, if she had a leading part in the ordeal he has been put through, or even a lesser part, acquiescing in it, was even aware of its unwholesome nature, then she is toast boys and girls, and as a lawyer, the Law Commision or whatever governing body certifies these creatures should see to it that that field of employment is closed to her on her exit from all and any prospect of public office, unless she/it is to declare her/itself dictator.

    Time to come clean, or show a clean pair heels and vanish into well-deserved oblivion and ignominy. If she is innocent of all wrongdoing, then she must swiftly launch and see that it gets its business done as swiflty too an extraordinary far-reaching inquiry of a type never before known in Scotland, and must stand down from her position until it concludes, resuming only if her hands are squeaky-clean.

    A special council of MPs, MSPs should convene, outdoors if necessary -a gathering, observing social-distancing to consider the matter, and as there’s a clear majority of elected representatives for it, the independence question too, and end this forced union. It was a rough-wooing, it needn’t be quite as rough or protracted ending, we can settle the matter amicably this spring have it sorted by the summer, in due course afterwards apportioning the mutual possessions, the wally-dugs and toast-rack, once the main business is settled. Residual UK can of course keep their royal personage-gargoyles (though they might be worth a fair ransom), nuclear death-trap subs and bombs, and sundry other detritus of their perfidious misrule.

    Let’s have an end to this now. They might have suspended elections, but no water-cannon or CS gas will stop the Scots if their leadership is not true to them and has betrayed them, and if so that cabal ought never dare show their faces this side of the border again.

  • Hatuey

    Moan, moan, moan.

    500 years of European imperialism and concomitant resistance across the world tells me Scotland and its people aren’t ready for independence. At least, not yet. There’s nothing remotely resembling a traditional National Liberation Movement in Scotland today.

    This crisis might change all that. And it might not.

    The same can be said of the neoliberal-globalist system. On one hand there are those who blame it for the Coronavirus crisis and on the other many are praying for its revival and the creature comforts it supplies.

    How will it all pan out? Nothing is clear or certain. I’d probably bet that Britain and capitalism will claim victory either way. The economic bounce-back after this is going to be worth seeing. I think we are going to see a lot of 50’s-style miracles.

    On an even more positive note, the importance of the NHS, public health, and communitarianism is going to be underlined massively by this crisis. Coronavirus doesn’t care about class or borders; it doesn’t make sense any more to say “I don’t give a fuck about what those guys over there are doing or experiencing” because their behaviour and plight is now existentially relevant to yours.

    I feel like apologising for being optimistic but there are enough gloomy people around.

    As for Salmond and dislodging the SNP imposters, if ever there was a time to walk quietly and carry a big stick, this is it. The truth is it’s their party and it’s their right to be bastards. That’s politics.

    If people in Scotland want something different, i.e. a real independence movement, they need to build one like everybody else and stop moaning and waiting for someone to hand them it on a plate. SNP loyalists must know now that the SNP isn’t even able to guarantee the flimsiest impersonation of that today.

1 2 3 4 5

Comments are closed.