The Great Cover-Up 119

The greatest cover-up in modern Scottish history is underway. I am not permitted to say more at present. I will however venture to say that this is massively bigger than just the attempt to imprison me, that most of these documents are also being withheld from the Holyrood Inquiry.

In stating they are banning Alex Salmond’s solicitors also from releasing any of the documents, the Crown is admitting their existence.

I have made a redaction to avoid any further accusation of jigsaw identification.

I am EXTREMELY keen for you to follow tomorrow’s procedural hearing where the question of what evidence is permitted will be addressed. That’s tomorrow, 9.45am British Summer Time. The dial in instructions are here.

Dial (+44)-207 660 8149
Access code 137 161 9904

I really do not know why it is a telephone system and not internet, obviously it is the court and not me. Please do listen in. I realise nothing much happened at the last two procedural hearings, but this should be very different. I am very anxious indeed that the powers that be should not get the impression that public interest is waning.

Please do go to the linked page and check their instructions about what you are and are not allowed to do.


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]

Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:

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>

119 thoughts on “The Great Cover-Up

1 2 3
  • PaddyT

    You should move to the Republic of Ireland and have more freedom of expression. I could write any comments on any UK trial without any worry of what the CPS thought .

    • Martinned

      That’s generally true for people abroad. This is not the sort of offence where the CPS would think it worth their time to get an EAW.

    • Tom Welsh

      You could move to Russia and have more freedom of expression.

      Although, on consideration, that might suit their purposes very well.

  • Ilya G Poimandres

    I was thinking why it’s phone too, I guess it would be easier to track people who record court procedures more than once.

    I’ll join again tomorrow, I am expecting to be disappointed, because they seem to want to deny you everything.

    Good luck! 🙂

  • Ross

    All these poisonings the Russian state is supposedly doing, and yet they don’t seem very good at it. Both Skripals survived, as has Navalny.

  • Ilya G Poimandres

    What possible benefit does Putin get out of it? Kid scores single digits in elections, and all Russians I speak to say he is a traitor (no worse thing to be for Russians). He is no threat. In fact, he turns Russians away from Atlanticism because of their visceral reaction to him.

    However, a slow death for a ‘martyr’ is great for propaganda, and the west at least pushes more hate towards Russians from its confused citizenry – perfectly in line with the tactics Western leaders have been using since Edward Bernays in the early 20th century!

  • Bill

    It really is hard to comprehend that this sort of thing is happening in Scotland today.It’s really shameful. People that speak truth to power should be lauded instead of being intimidated and criminalised. You have my full support Craig and I will be dialling in tomorrow.
    Good Luck and keep on keeping on.

  • Peter N

    Is the dial-in a free-phone number call or do people get charged, perhaps premium rate, for the call?

  • dearieme

    So comforting to think that an independent Scotland would be in the hands of creatures like Sturgeon.

  • James L

    The best of luck tomorrow. Sadly, it appears that justice in Scotland and England is now subject to luck as much as to law.

  • pete

    Craig, from what you say it looks like the legal bunch acting for the little sisters without mercy are conspiring with the powers that be to silence Scotland’s most articulate voice in favour of independence. It is an invidious position to be in, and I wish you the best of luck tomorrow. In the long run this cover up will not work and it is in everybody’s interest that the lid is prised off this can of worms as soon as possible.

  • Peter

    “The greatest cover-up in modern Scottish history is underway.”

    Given the power-play taking place, and the huge stakes to be lost or gained by the SNP cabal and both the Scottish and British Establishments, it is not entirely surprising that these seemingly totalitarian measures are being descended to.

    Stay focussed, vigilant and strong Craig, justice has a funny habit of popping up where it’s least wanted and expected, as the Salmond accusers found out.

    What is happening here, this seeming travesty of justice, is of such national importance that it should be attracting international attention, though from exactly who I’m not sure. Many believe, for instance, that Amnesty International has fallen into disrepute in recent times. Craig has commented previously that he expects his case to go all the way to the ECHR – we shall see.

    If all this was more widely known about by the British public I have no doubt there would be widespread outrage and disgust.

    Nonetheless, although Craig is being denied a jury trial just now, I am left with the strong feeling that, as happened in the Salmond trial, justice will triumph somewhere along the road at the end of all this.

    • Squeeth

      As a government, the Snats seem to leave a lot to be desired. Perhaps they would rather be the confederates of the British state so that the failings of their rule won’t matter? Now that they rule (sort of) the Tartan Tory derision of Old Liarbour is easier to spot, despite the New Liarbour lurch from the right to the far right.

      Using state power to silence a dissenter might be quite the aphrodisiac for an out partei enjoying the feeling of being in. I hope you wipe the floor with these soulless utilitarian bastards but it won’t be easy with the legal establishment gagging to do to you what they are doing to Assange and the nameless hosts whom the British state has had tortured and murdered. I’m glad that you are clearly match fit because this is a war of attrition. Either way, when they’ve finished persecuting you, they won’t be able to deny the fact that you keep mentioning, “All that and I’m still here”.

  • Richiard

    Tyranny & Lies. Politics have failed the people for centuries. Some still believe someone will come along to change all that.

  • Annne Galloway

    I’ll listen tomorrow Craig. I’ve been following the Scottish Government committee handling harassment complaints. Given the evasiveness of the civil servants so far I’m beginning to have sympathy to the accusations of an orchestration against Alex Salmond.

  • Big Jock

    I remember a scene in the film The Matrix.

    Morpheus asked : ” Do you want the blue pill or the red pill. Take the blue pill and you will forget even having this conversation. Take the red pill and you will see just how deep this wormhole goes”.

    I think we need to take the red pill to get to the rotten, festering core of this whole case.

  • Frazer

    May as well move to Moscow Craig. You would get a fairer hearing there than this joke of a judicial system.

    • schrodingers cat

      i’ve been telling that to craig for weeks. he isnt going to get justice here. no chance

  • Fastest Slowest

    Dirty & sad times for Scotland. This is not the country I know. Something needs to change.

  • Dom

    For it to look remotely convincing that you were arraigned in good faith they would have had to issue like charges against all those MSM outlets who supplied much clearer clues to identification, including most recently the BBC journalist/ talking head Kirsty Wark. That they charged you alone proves this is a blatantly political prosecution by an elite driven berserk by the Salmond verdict. Their knew how crudely obvious it would look but were confident there would be no protest from any quarter of the political or journalistic professions. The Scottish body politic and fourth estate are now rotten to the core. Worrying.

    • Andrew Ingram

      If the Lord Advocate has so much faith in his case he wouldn’t object to anything Craig wanted to produce in court as he would be able to ridicule it.
      Mind you the prosecution might lead its case in such a cack handed fashion that the judge pishes him or herself laughing, leaving nothing for Craig’s team to do.
      I do hope that there will be a permanent record of tomorrow’s proceedings in the form of a court stenographer’s record.

  • Wazdo

    All the very best for tomorrow Craig. As an Englishman who believes that the Scots should be in charge of their own fate, I wish you well.

  • Republicofscotland

    Have you spoken with Salmond on the matter of evidence that he possesses, and would it be possible to introduce it and collate it into your court appearance, or is that along with everything else that would prove your innocence now inadmissible, in this absurd and Kafkaesque kangaroo trial.

    I never thought I’d live to see the day a Scottish court would try to block a defendant’s evidence and witnesses in a trial.

    • craig Post author

      As per the first letter above, Alex’ evidence is in the hands of his solicitors and they are not allowed to show it to anybody.

      • Republicofscotland

        I presume you’ve travelled down every avenue in a bid to challenge this, or at least your legal council has? And is there a possibility of obtaining some sort of postponement to give you more time, if you need it, or has the court put that out of the question as well.

        You’re an accomplished orator Craig, I keep thinking of John Maclean’s speech from the dock, when I read about your up and coming unjust trial.

  • Brian

    As I posted before
    wonder what definition of likely they are going to use?
    1: having a high probability of occurring or being true : very probable

    This time it is the difference between accusers and the anonymous witness for the prosecution. Alex Salmond had vey many accusers only a few were witnesses for the prosecution. There were many witness for the prosecution but only a few were the anonymous witnesses.
    Does the names of the accusers refer to the anonymous witnesses?.
    Plus stating an intention to carry out an act is not the same as carrying out the act.
    It may be illegal to carry out an act but not illegal to state an intention to do so.

    Any defence should include intention. Intention is very important in law , If it was not the intention to break the court order this should be emphasised.

  • Ian

    All they are doing is making absolutely plain that you will not be permitted to mount a defence, by denying all relevant material evidence to the court. Therefore one can only conclude that a verdict has already been reached, and that the hearing will be a rubber stamp for the Crown.
    What they have done here is to make it clear to everybody that there is no justice, no adequate, independent legal system which will adjudicate fairly on the charges, and therefore this is a show trial, the likes of which we have been accustomed to jeer at and ridicule when it happens in other countries, usually despotic regimes. This whole affair, of which Craig’s witch trial is but one part, has damaged the Scottish legal system beyond credibility and possibly, beyond repair.
    Hard to believe, but this is modern UK/Scotland, where it might be appropriate to quote the Times from some time ago, “Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel?” Even more incredible is who wrote that, given current UK politics.

  • Jim

    Good luck Craig
    Anyone want to organise a protest outside the court? It might draw more attention to this travesty

      • Jim Sinclare

        Never kitchens, everybody will have a bookcase behind them. The camera requires rectitude. Maybe go to black & white, wear a wing-collar shirt, add a touch of echo to the audio, to embrace the surreality of discussing a document you’re not allowed to see.

        • Tom Welsh

          “Never kitchens, everybody will have a bookcase behind them”.

          One of the blessings of Zoom is that virtual backgrounds can be conjured up with ease. You want bookshelves? You gottem.

  • Squeeth

    Tally Ho! Craig, don’t forget to bury them in evidence which they rule inadmissible, because it adverts to your innocence, for the appeal.

    • Ingwe

      Presumably, your solicitors and counsel had considered the Crown’s move to claim your evidence is irrelevant and have prepared submissions to the contrary. It was foreseeable that the Crown would take this step especially how early on it became apparent on what your defence relied.

      Presumably if at tomorrow’s hearing the Crown’s argument is upheld, the decision is appealable? It seems to me that your defence is still arguable as a point of law even if your evidence is excluded. I haven’t had the chance to look at cases on the point.

      On a matter I dealt with the Crown pulled an equally appalling stroke in denying production of evidence which both sides know existed. In my case the relevant authority pretended that all relevant papers had been destroyed but were unable to provide details of how, when and on who’s authority the destruction had taken place. The dice are loaded against you.

  • Vivian O'Blivion

    From today’s hearings of the Committee looking into the Scottish Government’s handling of historic accusations of sexual harassment, the Committee has been provided with material which would (if read out) lead to jigsaw identification of the accusers. This material has not been published by the Scottish Government. If any attempt to give detailed references to this material is made by a committee member, Cair, Fabiani jumps in and halts proceedings. Why give the members of the committee access to this material “for information only”?
    From what I have seen, the Committee is allowing itself to be sidetracked and bogged down in the minutiae of who knew what and when, while remaining (purposefully?) blind to the elephant in the room.

  • Goose

    This could go all the way to the ECHR, which has found domestic courts’ decisions have violated article 6 (fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court finding the domestic court’s decisions had been arbitrary and manifestly unreasonable would be a humbling blow for Scotland.

      • Reiji

        The commitments of work prevent me from listening tomorrow, but further contributions to CM defense fund are most certainly available (especially if you’re going to Strasbourg).

        • craig Post author

          don’t know yet. getting financial estimates out of lawyers is like pulling teeth.

          But yesterday’s preparation for tomorrow’s procedural hearing, involving four lawyers, probably in itself cost about £8,000. One day.

          • craig Post author

            This is one of the reasons the Crown just opposes and blocks everything. They have unlimited funds, and think we will run out.

          • schrodingers cat

            i genuinely wish you good luck craig,

            i think for justice you will need the ECHR , you will find none in the uk

          • Hamish McGlumpha

            Craig, as per my point below: It is my understanding (from an experienced Scottish criminal lawyer), that you would require appellant permission from the Scottish courts to take the matter to Strasbourg.

            He is of the option that if the matter were ’embarrassing’ to Scottish ‘justice’ – as this almost certainly would be – such permission would be unlikely to be granted.

          • Tom Welsh

            The Crown has unlimited taxpayers’ money to use against us. But if we refuse to pay they have the right to use violence, up to and including killing us.

            Thanl goodness it’s a free country.

        • Jennifer Allan

          Don’t worry- we are behind you and will back you to the hilt, including finance, but let’s not anticipate the trial result. The only important verdicts are the judges’, and I would like to think they would take just as dim a view of the antics of the Crown Office, as the thousands of your supporters.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.