Craig Murray Defence Appeal Renewed 139


My new appeal for funds to continue my legal defence has now reached £42,300 of the £75,000 target. I am extremely grateful to all of the 2,053 people who have so far contributed to the top-up. The moral support from those who cannot afford to contribute is also very greatly appreciated. That is now £117,300 of the £150,000 needed in total.

I have today received a bill from my legal team for £60,563.40 in fees to date in defending the contempt of court charge against me for my reporting of the Alex Salmond trial.

In addition to this, I have paid a separate legal fee for a QC to draft a petition for a court to consider whether the accusers’ anonymity should be continued by the courts, given their continued participation in a high intensity public campaign against Alex Salmond and effectively against the verdict of the jury. I have also paid to commission the Panelbase poll proving that my blog was in no way a primary source of information for those who believe they have identified accusers.

In total to date £69,052 has been spent. Which means about £5,000 remains in the pot, and the main trial itself is currently scheduled for 21 January.

The Crown has adopted a policy of simply blocking everything the defence seeks to do: objecting to my witnesses, objecting to my own affidavit, objecting to the release of documentary evidence. In consequence there have been three preliminary hearings. Those who listened to last week’s hearing will know that these have resolved none of the questions at issue. The Crown constantly shifts its ground, or submits draft positions, and has not yet clarified the evidential basis for its charges, while blocking my evidence. They have objected to all of my witnesses being heard, and to the opinion poll being considered.

This has the appearance of what is known in the US as “Lawfare”. My financial resources are drained and there is a huge impact on me in terms of my time taken up – frankly very much worse than I anticipated – and an emotional strain too.

As a reminder, this is the list of documents from the Salmond case disclosure my which defence is seeking to access, and which the Crown is refusing to release.

To be plain, this is material which I know for certain to exist. I am not fishing. The Crown has admitted its existence in forbidding Alex Salmond’s own solicitors from releasing it to anybody, (including Alex). Much of this was kept out of the Salmond trial itself as “collateral evidence”, as I explained here.

The most likely next court hearing is to request the Court orders the Crown to produce this material. In effect, each court hearing costs about £20,000 in legal fees. It is now plain that I need at least double the £75,000 originally raised to get me through the trial. I am really very sorry to have to ask again, but I therefore need to request further contributions to my defence fund at this point.

I am deeply conscious that, the legal battle having caused my blogging output and depth of research to fall these last few weeks, there has been a drop-off in readership and in subscriptions, so I am handicapped in making this appeal precisely by the very legal battle I am appealing to try to fight. I also do realise these are hard times for people. I do not want anyone to give anything if it causes them even the slightest hardship.

I will post updates on progress from this renewed funding appeal. I have asked the lawyers to produce a version of their fee note which can be published.

Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above


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

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9

139 thoughts on “Craig Murray Defence Appeal Renewed

1 2 3 4
  • Twirlip

    I’ve donated, and I’ve renewed and increased my small subscription, too. (About time.)

    Nil illegitimi carborundum!

  • Nickle101

    Done. And good luck

    Craig, do you think they are intentionally dragging this out knowing it will cost you dearly, or is it a mixture of incompetence or panic in the background?

    • craig Post author

      I honestly don’t know. Obviously it’s no skin off their nose if it drags out, as they have effectively unlimited access to taxpayer funding.

      • Cubby

        “unlimited access to taxpayer funding”

        The scales of justice!!!!

        As I will no longer be contributing to a whole host of independence areas e.g. SNP, Wings, WGD as I have lost trust in so many people I will contribute to your fund raiser as I believe this persecution of individuals who support independence by the justice system has to stop.

        • Brianfujisan

          Hi Cubby

          I was wondering why you weren’t around over at the Wee Ginger Dug.. I’ve been mostly absent too…Everywhere… Stay the Fight Dude .

          • Cubby


            I never stay where I am not wanted. WGD won’t directly say I am not wanted but he makes it plain that I am not by intercepting and deleting my posts. So like Wings I will read but I won’t participate. Gone right off Mr Kavanagh for my own reasons which I may post sometime in the future.

          • Easily Confused

            Replying to you both…WGD, He’s a wrong un. Independence writing is an income stream, why would he want that to stop.

      • Nickle101

        I don’t think we can compete with the Bank of England, but I am fairly confident that you can continue to count on significant support. Although it is your neck on the line, many people feel you are fight for us all by hold power to account.

      • Dungroanin

        If I may offer a slight corrective to the phrase ‘tax payers money’?

        It is an old lie that hides the reality of Money.
        The government does not need taxes to fund its spending. It always creates it by instruction. It THEN taxes the recipient of the magic money tree leaves in the same leaves, thus giving the currency legitimacy. It works for any government that issues it’s own currency. (As it would Scotland!).

        Anyway the words ‘tax payers money’ have been weaponised again within the last few weeks to stop people realising that the government creates what it spends out of thin air!
        Taxes then cancels out most of it. The difference is what is left as everyone’s private sector SAVINGS.

        I can only recommend Prof Richard Murphy’s new YouTube series, done without notes in short mini lectures as a authoritative source to back all this up.

        CM faces ‘unlimited‘ public funding not restricted by tax payer revenue!

        But hopefully it will not have to be matched to see Justice done!

        • Iain Stewart

          Thanks for pointing this out, which Mr Shigimitsu would probably have done were he around. Wasting the public wealth doesn’t affect only “taxpayers” but every citizen or child (although even kids pay VAT with their pocket money). It is theft. As for those who believe in “taxpayers’ money” where on earth do they imagine it is all kept ?

  • Courtenay Barnett

    Mr. Murray,

    ” objecting to my own affidavit”

    On what conceivable basis can an accused person’s own affidavit ( his evidence) be totally excluded?

    • Squeeth

      It puts the burden on whoever is hearing the case to stop them taking the piss; a bad career move. It’s harder to be vindictive to a jury.

  • Patsy Millar

    Can only donate a wee bit at a time but will continue to do so as and when. In the meantime (and I know this sounds trite) look after yourself.

  • Tatyana

    Thanks for keeping us informed, Mr. Murray, I’m sure you’ll win this battle, a lot of people are on your side, we’ll support you. In addition to donations, it is very important to spread the message over the Internet.

    the line “Click HERE TO DONATE if you do not see the Donate button above” has the link
    and leads me to the beginning of “Craig Murray Defence Fund Launched” article with the same text and link in the ending.

    • FraPer

      Thanks Tatyana. Have donated.

      I don’t want to sidetrack but what do you know or hear inside Russia about the Navalny case? I recall some earlier comment from you that Navalny really is but a small opposition player in your country but presented by media as if he leads the Russian opposition.

      • Tatyana

        Thanks for asking, FraPer.
        Me too donate little wee bit and also keep subscription and share the link on social media. I’m sorry I can’t donate significantly, but I believe that every crumb helps, because there are many of us, and if we put our efforts together we can keep Mr. Murray afloat.

        Navalny, well, recently we had large political event here in Russia – amendments to the Constitution. While most opposition and Western supporters were discussing “Putin will now become the monarch”, it was clear that the majority of the russians are focused (and fully support) another amendment in the package. Namely, the exclusion of foreign citizens from holding public office. The ammendment totally eliminates Navalny’s chance to become a president.
        His anti-corruption fund has just about 40 employees, and his political party hardly gets more than 1 or 2 % in votings.

        I was wondering what would he do now? Well, Navalny closed his fund.
        He explained he is sued for defamation, that’s why he stops this company. I don’t believe it, to be honest. It’s not the first time he is sued, including defamation. He is a lawyer, after all, he can easily refute false accusations.

        On the poison case I bookmarked this:
        Navalny didn’t dine during the flight, but before the departure he is seen in the airport video, his assistant Ivan Pahomov brought him a cup of tea or coffee

        The chief doctor’s statement:

        “No oxybutyrates, barbiturates, strychnine, convulsive or synthetic poisons were found in the body … only alcohol and caffeine were found in the urine. At the same time, 2-ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate, a substance that does not have a toxic effect, was found on washes from clothes and hands.”

        and a very interesting info from Boris Teplykh, who described the behaviour of Navalny’s family and German team who arrived to get Navalny away

        Todays news say Germany confirmed Navalny was poisoned by Novichok and German government demands they stop the Nord Srtream 2. Ah, and they don’t give any answers to russian doctors or russian prosecution enquires.

  • Guy Foulkes

    Hi Craig,

    You’re asking for funds for your defence for this: can you explain to us why those documents from the Salmond trial are relevant to your trial?

    Your trial is on whether or not you published information leading to identify the complainants. I do not follow how any documents in the Salmond case are relevant to that? If your argument’s that you were hinting at the identities of women who were conspiring against Salmond, surely if those women were also complainants, by doing so you reveal/hint at the identities?

    If they were not complainants — and you of course know who the complainants are — It’s unclear why you hinted at identities without publishing the names. (I mean in your Yes Minister parody)

    I genuinely don’t understand how the Salmond trial documents could have any relevance to your defence?

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Mailed my check for $250. 00 yesterday. Let me know if Natwest drags its feet again, and I wili telegraph you the cash.

    Good luck.

  • Jennifer Allan

    I am old enough to remember a time when the present antics of the Crown Office would have invoked public outrage. The frankly scandalous prosecution of the Ranger’s auditors, was finally admitted to have been ‘malicious’, thanks to the defence eventually finding an e-mail stating the CO wanted to ‘get’ their auditor’s business. All other documentary evidence, such as minutes of meetings etc, was either shredded or not recorded in the first place. The then Lord Advocate spent a lot of taxpayer’s money attempting to make his position protected from litigation or prosecution. He was righty told no-one is above the law, however high the office.

    The CO’s and Scottish Government’s refusal to release important evidence to the present Salmond Inquiry, demonstrates just how arrogant and unaccountable our so called ‘justice’ systems have become. I hope Jackie Bailey & Co manage to mount a legal challenge to obtain these missing documents. Nicola Sturgeon makes a great play of her Government’s wish to be ‘open and transparent’. Put your action where your mouth is Nicola.

    Yes of course I’ll donate -next pension day! Most ordinary persons have no idea how much it costs to defend a prosecution. As to instigating court actions, Alex Salmond’s £500,000 award ‘for the legal expenses’ of his Judicial review gives you some idea. That did not include compensation. Those two defendants in the Ranger’s prosecution each had already paid nore than £1000,000 in lawyer’s fees. They must have had very good public liability insurance to afford that.

  • Margaret+Eleftheriou

    Glad to donate. I salute your integrity and determination not to give way. You speak for many of us.

  • Thomas

    £50 donated, thanks for all your hard work Craig, us ordinary folk really appreciate what your doing. Dont give up Craig.

  • Rob Fairhurst

    I’ve donated what I can to you Craig and I will again should you need it. Keep fighting the good fight my man.

  • Donald Hodgson

    Donated once, twice, and hereafter,..and always will do when ‘normal’ justice is denied to the common citizen.
    Upholding of one law across the board for all is absolutely vital, not a selective factor in giving others legal advantage.

  • Neil

    I certainly do not begrudge making another contribution, as one who can afford to do and is offended by this abuse of power. But it galls me that I am also contributing to the costs of a malicious prosecution through taxation. There is something badly wrong with a legal system where access to justice depends on money. It is no surprise to me that a lot of lawyers came to a sticky end in the French Revolution.

  • 6033624

    Unfortunately I can’t give anything to your fund right now but will be in a position to do so before you are at court, I really feel that your case isn’t just about YOU, Craig Murray, but is much more important than one man. It’s about the ability to report fairly and fully and about our press singularly failing to do just that – otherwise they would be unable to go after ONLY you. This case is important for the freedom of the press, freedom of speech and about what kind of country we want our children to live in. I don’t believe I’m exaggerating either. So I’ll contribute in the coming weeks. Good luck with this, if anyone can overcome them it’s you.

    • arby

      From the little I’ve gleaned from CM’s posts I think you’re far off the mark if you reckon he needs to be reminded it’s not just about HIM.

  • Graham Adamson

    Donation made. Stay strong and keep fighting. I know it’s not your supporters whose necks are on the line here, but we are all behind you and we will all keep supporting you.

  • Wikikettle

    You do all the work, take on the state, we read all about it…the least we can do is support you Craig.

  • M.J.

    I put a modest coin in the tin, because of the principle that every accused person deserves a fair trial. I hope you get that, whatever the outcome.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.