Official: Lady Dorrian Rules Courts Should Apply Different Standards to Bloggers and Mainstream Media 241

We are racing to lodge our application to the Supreme Court by Friday, so I am just going to post an email I just sent my legal team:


This is an extraordinary passage of the Opinion:

“(4) The applicant describes himself as a “journalist in new media”. Whatever that may involve, it is relevant to distinguish his position from that of the mainstream press, which is regulated, and subject to codes of practice and ethics in a way in which those writing as the applicant does are not. To the extent that the submissions for the applicant make comparisons with other press contempts, and the role of mainstream journalists, this is a factor which should be recognised”.

What does the last sentence mean in practice? Well, submissions for the applicant only made comparisons with other press contempts in two areas:

1) Disproportionate sentencing compared to other press contempts

2) Implicitly, that the opinion poll showing mainstream media responsible for far more jigsaw identification demonstrates selective prosecution.

It seems to me much more likely she is referring to 1). In which case she can ONLY mean there should be a different sentencing tariff for bloggers than mainstream media. IN PRACTICE SHE IS ARGUING THAT BLOGGERS SHOULD BE JAILED AND MAINSTREAM MEDIA NOT.

If she did mean 2), she can only be arguing that a different bar for contempt? jigsaw identification? should be applied to mainstream media journalists as opposed to bloggers, and it is OK selectively to prosecute bloggers but not mainstream media for doing the same thing.

Either way, this seems to me a screaming red flag Article 10 AND due process area that ought to grab the attention of the Supreme Court.

It seems to me quite incredible to argue that an employee of Murdoch or other tabloids has intrinsically higher ethical standards than a former senior diplomat, British Ambassador and University Rector, and therefore the tabloid hack must be, openly and acknowledged, treated by more favorable standards by the courts.

Frankly, that is nuts. I find it hard to believe she wrote that paragraph – but I am very glad she did. It shows a very great deal indeed.


There is of course a major difference in the finances of bloggers and mainstream media and it is an unfortunate truth that an appeal to the Supreme Court will cost hundreds of thousands of pounds. Details of how to contribute to Craig Murray’s Defence Fund are here:

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
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

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>

241 thoughts on “Official: Lady Dorrian Rules Courts Should Apply Different Standards to Bloggers and Mainstream Media

1 2 3 4
  • Jock McLaren

    “To the extent that the submissions for the applicant make comparisons with other press contempts, and the role of mainstream journalists, this is a factor which should be recognised”.

    What does this mean? MSM scribblers and CM are still subject to the same laws, not that those have ever slowed Murdoch and his squads of truth-manglers. I read her statement as

    “I choose to emphasise this point, and I am going to give it any recognition I choose, without specifying what it is or the standards I use.”

    The idea of “jigsaw” identification is a logical absurdity. Taken to its extreme, and because nobody knows what other information the next person has, it means that nobody would be able to state anything about a case that hasn’t already been published in some official capacity. And as a case progresses, even the MSM hacks would be under ever-tightening restraints as to what they could publish.

    • TonyN

      “The idea of “jigsaw” identification is a logical absurdity”

      And on those grounds, an appeal must be made on a point of law.

      I am appalled that the Court did not recuse itself from making a judgment based on such a logically absurd doctrine, and should have recused itself from attempting to rule on such a stupid concept.

      This makes Dorrian and her accomplices appear as thick as mince, and guilty of a contempt of their own court, in fact. As any child can see what they patently do not, this gives proof that they are motivated by political considerations rather than the cause of justice.

      Quis Custodiet and all that…

      Would a petition to the Queen (of Scotland) do any good?

  • willie

    The selection for prosecution and then conviction of same of Craig Murray should be no mystery to any of us.

    What we are seeing is straight out of the Brigadier General Sir Frank Kitson playbook where the use of the police, prosecution and judiciary are deployed against political opponents. Such action thus far has been restricted to intimidation and jailing. But as was the case in Ireland such strategy extends, should it be required to extra judicial killing.

    The British state has never given up a colony willingly, democratically, and without a fight. It is a dirty business and this is now a dirty war. A dirty war fought by the forces that will stop at nothing. Infiltration, surveillance, bribery, blackmail, false flag, media control, hearts and minds, incarceration of opponents, extra judicial killing – it’s all there.

    Read Kitson, it’s what the shadowy forces are trained to do. But if we realise that, then we can understand what is happening around us. This is a dirty war, and its getting dirtier.

    • Cotter

      Willie, Yes I think you are ‘right on the money’ with that statement.

      I would also add that there is also a strong feminist driver component, orchestrated by Sturgeon, to Craig’s current predicament. Do I really have to point out that all the accredited ‘journalists’ who also added their jigsaw pieces to the identities are women? And of course Leslie Evans was awarded a whacking great pay rise for all her work in AS’s sordid fit-up.

      • TonyN

        Agree about the whiff of feminism.

        The whole sorry story is very reminiscent of Tam O’Shanter’s misfortune in catching sight of a coven in action.

        Maybe Craig ought to make a break for the border, where women like Sturgeon and Dorrian have no power.

    • John O'Dowd

      “Such action thus far has been restricted to intimidation and jailing. But as was the case in Ireland such strategy extends, should it be required to extra judicial killing.”

      It may already have happened – in the strange case of the ‘suiciding’ of Willie McRae!

    • Intp1

      Dont know why you show your hand so Craig.
      IMHO you would be better trying to win than being right.

      • Jimmy Riddle

        Intp1 – it all depends on what you mean by `win’ – Craig Murray is fighting the good fight in a good way and everything he does sheds light on the corruption and putrefaction at the heart of the system.

        At the same time, I would feel much better about it if someone younger and in better health had been sentenced to time in chokey …..

    • amanfromMars

      Such action thus far has been restricted to intimidation and jailing. But as was the case in Ireland such strategy extends, should it be required to extra judicial killing.
      — willie June 10, 2021 at 00:48

      And that also raises the possibility, should such a strategy be required ….and as was obviously necessarily most recently thought appropriately the case in N.Ireland, ….. of nigh on half a century of hellish Troubles to boot in order to take root and prosper, willie.

      When the law and government does neither service nor server justice, madness and mayhem, CHAOS and conflict rule and reign naturally by common default and such wreaks havoc on corrupt and perverted systems and their administrations/prime drivers and supporting officers?

  • James Cook

    ….hmmmmm…Perhaps……… the only acceptable solution to avoiding the creation of a martyr or the perception that a “mistake” has possibly been made, is to manufacture it all into a fine FARCE………which after a sufficient length of time and expensive legal discussion can eventually be blamed on a lowly incompetent government clerk somewhere in the Scottish legal system?

    Perhaps, someone has realized that Craig might actually be more dangerous to the establishment if he was inside a prison than on the outside trying to cope with never-ending legal arguments and ever increasing expenses and worries?

    With sufficient imagination, time and resources the “system” could create a never-ending sentence outside of a walled prison which would be far more painful for Craig and still send the desired message to others?


    • Giyane

      Yes, the intention is farce, for the audience of establishment crooks. A bunch of criminals who created the most recent terrorist murder on a London bridge, using one of their carelings fresh out of prison.

      This government is not interested in the lives of social workers, it needs terrorist soldiers to attack Russia and China. And its disdain for its blogger critics is total.

      Sturgeon is a bystander. This farce is organised by Pritti Patel and her Zionist mafia who are congregating in Cornwall. Just been listening to Laura Cuntibollox celebrating the end if the Trump era.

    • Cynicusj

      I cannot help drawing the following comparison:
      During the MPs expenses scandal, the instinct of Speaker Martin was to investigate and prosecute the leaker

      This completely missed the serious target of the actual revelations: the bunch of crooks and chancers milking the situation for what it was worth and ripping off the taxpayer.

      Likewise, Lady Dorrian and the two judges in her support are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. They mechanically endorse the conviction of a truth teller rather than recommend to the prosecuting authority – hello Mr Wolffe – the indictment the real culprits: in the former case the thieving MPs; in the latter, Nicola Sturgeon and her shameless hacks.

      STAY brave, Craig: posterity will revere your name; will damn those who have pursued and prosecuted you: – Sturgeon, [REDACTED], [REDACTED], (© J. Woolfe), Sturgeon, the alphabet coven, Dorian et cetera will be a stench in the nostrils of posterity.

    • John Cleary

      James, I fear that you are correct.

      There is NO WAY they wanted Craig Murray in prison during Jill’s trip to Buckingham Palace nor Boris the Clown’s G7 performance.

  • Jon Cofy

    Scott & Anor v Scott [[1913] AC 417]

    “In the darkness of secrecy, sinister interest and evil in every shape have full swing. Only in proportion as publicity has place can any of the checks applicable to judicial injustice operate. Where there is no publicity there is no justice.”

    “Publicity is the very soul of justice. It is the keenest spur to exertion and the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps the judge himself while trying under trial.”

    “The security of securities is publicity.”

    But amongst historians the grave and enlightened verdict of Hallam, in which he ranks the publicity of judicial proceedings even higher than the rights of Parliament as a guarantee of public security, is not likely to be forgotten:

    “Civil liberty in this kingdom has two direct guarantees; the open administration of justice according to known laws truly interpreted, and fair constructions of evidence; and the right of Parliament, without let or interruption, to inquire into, and obtain redress of, public grievances. Of these, the first is by far the most indispensable; nor can the subjects of any State be reckoned to enjoy a real freedom, where this condition is not found both in its judicial institutions and in their constant exercise.”

  • andic

    “(4) The applicant describes himself as a “journalist in new media”. Whatever that may involve, it is relevant to distinguish his position from that of the mainstream press, which is regulated, and subject to codes of practice and ethics in a way in which those writing as the applicant does are not….”

    Journalist in new media/ citizen journalist/ blogger-commentator / AMATEUR. To me this sentence tells two things: (1) She is contemptuous of Craig’s self-description and presumably those who share it, (2) She believes that it is not for the courts to pursue contempt cases against “proper” journalists because they self regulate (cough). The logic that leads to (2) is twisted beyond belief, there should be equality before the law and actually any points about professionalism and regulation, for what its worth, mean the perpetrators from old media should know better.

    “….To the extent that the submissions for the applicant make comparisons with other press contempts, and the role of mainstream journalists, this is a factor which should be recognised”.

    Well if its considered at all then it should be a mitigating factor – lower circulation, reduced access to professional guidance or editing, etc etc

    I remember that Craig was quite fair to Lady D at the start of all this it stuck in my mind because the reporting was concurrent with the JA case and he was scathing of Baraitser.

  • Joe+Mellon

    Surely her career must be over. She has become an embarrassment, like previously Lord Denning. Legal kicking inevitable from judges who have not lost their marbles.

    • Wikikettle

      I am sure Craig’s case is going to be discussed and publicised throughout the world on Independent news. The Grayzone, with Max Blumenthal, Aaron Mate’, Going Underground with Afshin Rattansi, The Duran, Novara Media, Roger Walters, John Pilger, The Jimmy Dore Show will all speak out and add to a massive funding campaign. The Cretins won’t win !

        • Wikikettle

          For those interested in Legal matters in Canada and US, try watching Viva Frei and Roger Barnes on You Tube. They have a huge legal audience and Craig’s case would interest them greatly as both are in his boat.

          • ginger ninja

            In a parallel universe there hangs a painting of Lady Dorrian, it shines with the light of wisdom, fairness and justice. Every time the Lady Dorian of our universe passes judgement, it shines brighter.

            Oscar would have called it ‘the reverse Dorian’.

  • Tatyana

    in the last discussion, I described my vision of a just society, I continue to add:
    in a just society, the Government, the Court and Journalism are independent and are separate branches acting in the interests of the Society. What the judge revealed is a blatant violation of this principle.

    Her reasoning suggests that she considers the pro-government stance of mainstream journalists to be the norm. She doesn’t see them on the same shelf as independent bloggers. She also considers it normal for the judiciary to jail a blogger while the mainstream journalist has carte blanche.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s okay for Lady Dorrian that a judge can receive direct orders from the government. It seems to me that Lady Dorian sees her role in serving the Government, not the country.

    Also, I’m afraid your National Journalistic Union has similar views, as revealed via their refusal to prolongate Mr. Murray’s membership.

  • Jen

    Lady Dorrian is obviously arguing that only so-called “journalists” who write for approved media outlets, or media outlets subject to “regulation” (that is, instructions by the British government and/or its various agencies like MI5 and MI6 through tools such as the infamous D-notice) should be recognised as “journalists” and therefore allowed to engage in jigsaw identification and other practices for which Craig Murray and any others who follow in his steps might be tried, convicted and jailed.

    • Tatyana

      I agree
      Even the Russian judge imprisoning Navalny did not talk about his status as an independent media, or, of his position, which differs from that of mainstream journalists.
      I don’t mean to say that it didn’t matter to the judge, it probably did. But she was judging him for what he did in that fraud case, not for his blogging. And I think that Navalny should have been impeccable, since he was looking for publicity.
      Stealing with one hand while exposing officials of corruption with the other hand is not a smart idea.

  • Uwontbegrinningsoon

    The award winning Jonathan Cook and Glen Greenwald are primarily online journalists. Cook has recently written an article describing the difficulty in getting the MSM to publish his work. Ditto For Pilger. Does The Dear Lady judge consider those journalists equally unworthy of protection because they are mainly an online presence.

    A retired ambassador, Rector and published historian. If Mr Murray is paid for his blog writing, then surely he is a journalist within the common meaning of the word.

    The Leveson enquiry took evidence from at least one investigator that was told to join the NUJ so he could be treated as a journalist.

    I am sure that numerous convictions of journalists employed by the Murdoch empire were overturned by the Court of Appeal.

    The Murdoch press and others employ or employed Rees, Fillary and Vian. Watch ‘Murder in the Car Park’. Not sure what ethics she is referring to.

  • Alf Baird

    I’m with Willie above @ 00.48 on this.

    The ongoing political persecution of Scottish independence leaders and campaigners follows on from what is already an oppressive colonial regime and hence colonial justice system which has inbuilt contempt for Scotland’s indigenous people, reflected in Scotland having the highest prison population per head in Western Europe. In this, and talking of contempt, Cesaire reminds us that:

    “…colonization dehumanizes even the most civilized man; that colonial activity, colonial enterprise, colonial conquest, which is based on contempt for the native and justified by that contempt, inevitably tends to change him who undertakes it; that the colonizer, who in order to ease his conscience gets into the habit gets of seeing the other man as an animal, accustoms himself to treating him like an animal, and tends objectively to transform himself into an animal.”

    Analysis of Scotland’s longstanding colonial oppression (and its anglophone cultural hegemony) is covered in my book ‘Doun-Hauden’ (‘oppressed’ in Scots), and also briefly here:

    • Jules Orr

      Aye, Scotland’s longstanding colonial oppression. I heard recently that Scots constituted 9 pc of Britain’s people, yet accounted for 25 pc of those employed by the British in India.

      How much did the British loot from India? About $45 Trillion in 173 years according to top economists.

      Scots should be grateful there isn’t a powerful movement for global reparations …

        • Jules Orr

          If there was ever a more contemptuous and pitiless colonial oppression let me know, Ron.

          • jake

            I don’t take issue with what you may have heard and that Scots constitute 9pc of Britain’s people. Let me add to your gleanings with the information that in the period between 1600 and 1700 the relative populations of these two countries was quite different. In that century the Scots represented about 20-25% of the population of Britain.

      • Alf Baird

        Postcolonial literature (e.g. Fanon; Memmi) informs that elements of the bourgeoisie native population invariably join in the looting and plundering of their own people in their quest to ‘mimic’ the supposedly superior culture and language of the colonizer and to maintain their status and privilege under colonial rule. What did you think Burns’ ‘sic a parcel o rogues in a naition’ meant, Jules? Scots may well have accounted for a third of the British Army at one time (you might ask yourself why?) yet such is the poverty and lack of opportunity for any colonised people that a few dollars and a gun may be put into the native’s hand to do an oppressor’s bidding (Fanon).

        The vast majority of Scots received no advantage from imperial rule or from their own colonisation and the latter still comes at great cost to a people and nation which in large part remains under-developed because of it.

      • DunGroanin

        Wasn’t the great Poet also a tax collector?
        Just another petty patel cog of Colonialism until he achieved enlightenment?
        The system was indeed refined and implemented across the sub continent by a son of Scotland – that invented a whole new surname for the East India Companies tax collectors.

      • John O'Dowd

        It’s called economic conscription Jules. When the poor ‘Jock’ bastards were driven by colonial-imposed poverty into the only ‘work’ available to them. They were numerous, brave, cheap and disposable.

        “And no great mischief if they fall”
        — General Wolfe on the fate of the MacDonalds he used to take the Heights of Abraham at Quebec.

        Imperialism is violence and compared or subject peoples are always pressed into military service on behalf of their oppressors. Hence, for example, remains of people from as far as Syria, (present day) Hungary and North Africa (Carthage) found at Hadrian’s wall.

        • John O'Dowd

          “Imperialism is violence and compared or subject peoples”

          Should of course read
          Imperialism is violence and CONQUERED or subject peoples. Blood automatic script!

          The Scots of courseware not ‘conquered’ they were sold out by their ain fowk – their alleged betters – the type that now forms the judiciary that even yet sells them out.

  • Robert Dyson

    As I have read Craig’s blog for some time, it seems to me that he has the highest standards in every way, better than the MSM. My preference is that Scotland does not leave the union (I would hope for a federal system with England also with regional parliaments) but I have nothing but huge admiration for Craig Murray; the courage and total integrity shine out.

  • SA

    Not wishing to connect too many dots but is it not significant that just under a year ago Mr. Murray wrote about the obstacles to being a recognized journalist regarding his application for membership?

    What has happened since the 2013 Snowden revelations, the establishment has held the media completely captive and there is no such thing as independent media anymore.

    So now it is time to get rid of the bloggers and independent journalists and this is done with the co-operation of the journalists themselves. Considering all the calamities facing the world, you only need to see the proportion of reportage that is devoted to a baby called Lilibet Diana, whilst totally ignoring serious events such as the curbing of free speech in this case and the Assange case, to see what a perilous state our democracy has reached.

    • Wikikettle

      We should stop using the term “Main Stream Media” MSM from now on. I will be using the term “State Sponsored Media” SSM.

      • SA

        Not wishing to be pedantic but your suggestion has an inherent contradiction because in the neoliberal world, ‘light touch government’ (Hahaha) is what is advocated. May I suggest ‘State approved media’ SAM for short, no relation to the famous uncle.

          • Wikikettle

            I was thinking on the parallel lines of the other evil State Sponsored Terrorism.

  • Crispa

    The discrimination is just as blatant in the original findings of non-contempt. The court had rejected the idea that lack of intention to cause a breach was a factor so any information that leads to identification is a breach intended or not. But in paragraph 88 of the original judgment you get this.

    “In respect of one of the complainers the Crown case ties this article in with the tweet of 29 March. Even taking the two together we do not consider that the material is likely to lead to identification of a complainer. The main basis upon which this was originally said to constitute a breach was that a google search was said to throw up her name. We have no basis upon which to accept that submission. It is a matter of agreement that the organisation referred to receives funding from different public–sector grants and that a number of officials, elected and in the civil service, will be involved in administering them. On the information provided to us we cannot conclude that this, or the tweet of 19 March, together or separately constitute a breach of the order. Nor do we consider that the reference to a specific journalist in association with a complainer is a breach of the order. It is reasonable to assume that such a journalist would have very many contacts within the world of government, and there is nothing in this material to make a link with a complainer such that may be identified”.

    Had they found this item in breach they would have opened the can of worms that would make all the other journalists in breach also. The judges very cannily ducked the issue to scapegoat the “non-journalist” against the obvious breaches of the other so-called “journalists”.

  • Tatyana

    These events cause a storm of emotions in me, because it matters for my country too.

    I did not like at all what Putin commented on the landing of the plane with Protasevich in Belarus – he cited the example of Evo Morales’ plane during the pursuit of Snowden.

    And although our opposition here is not crystal-clear and does not follow highly moral ideals, after all they are private persons.
    It’s another matter that elected governments gladly embrace the illegal dictatorial habits, an example of which they find in the West.

    It is very sad to realize that there is no true democracy anywhere. Nowhere is the true freedom of speech.
    But, you at least have Assange, Snowden, and Mr. Murray, and I hope that you are fully aware of what kind of jewel you have. I hope you can support and save them.

      • Tatyana

        I don’t think he is supported. He is simply given a shelter. Mr. Snowden feels safe, has a job and a family and recently they had their first baby.
        As to political position, he is prettty critical of the Russian government and supportive of the protests. I believe he is not supporting Navalny’s opposition, but rather the people’s right to protest.
        Anyway, it’s a good sign. Looks like my government is not that oppressive as to demand loyality from Mr. Snowden. He is speaking what he thinks is right to speak, quite freely. I’m his Twitter follower.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    In essence, the whole process is a Show Trial – you are in good company. Small comfort that will be – it is horrifying.

    I hugely admire your sustained courage. It is not easy to face down the British state – twice, or rather for almost 20 years. Even though this is a local political struggle in Scotland, one cannot but suspect the hand of the British hard state (SIS, and I don’t mean the energy drinks) – revenge for Uzbekistan/whistleblowing/Assange and a salutary warning to other potential whistleblowers, to keep their mouths and keyboards firmly shut. As with Assange, this whole thing has been merely a pretext.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    In other words, I would pose the question as to whether the entire charade has been enacted in bad faith. I would question whether those who have driven this attack on a whistleblower actually believe in what they are arguing. I would as whether this – the legal process – has been an instrument to help ‘rid them of this turbulent priest’ and to send a warning to other potential ‘turbulent priests’.

    This leads one to question whether our ‘contempt’ ought to be aimed, not at a sincere whistleblower who has risked his life for nearly two decades to expose the mendacity of power, but rather at those who operate as agents of that power.

    • giyane

      Suhayl Saadi

      Hi. Yes. Alex Salmond did none of the things they said he did. The complainers didn’t complain, but Sturgeon took the non existent complaints to the police. The non-complainers should never have been granted anonymity for their non-existent complaints. All of that was fiction, narrative, bollywood.

      Then James Wolffe invented a crime called jigsaw identification of complainers that doesn’t exist and Dorrian has invented a theory that potentially these non-existent victims might be identified, in the same way as in good detective fiction one might start to speculate which of the fictional characters has a motive. Quite frankly it brings Scottish law into disrepute that so much time and money has been expended on this whole empty charade, just to annoy one man with a blog.

      All the best. I’ve had an anonymous call from a Scottish voice this morning. I hope the SNP are staring to sweat about their bullying coming to light.

  • Martin Kernick

    Dorian’s comments are basically an admission of the bias that has pervaded all of her judgement in this case. If the high court is not equally corrupt it will censure her and absolve Craig, but I remain sceptical that this will happen. In a moral world, a judge exhibiting the tortuous level of bias that has been evident in this case, would be deemed unfit to be a judge at all.

    • Tatyana

      Corrupt goverments need fake judges. You cannot improve if you let it go on.
      We went through this and concluded that impunity only strengthens the mafia-like union.

      If Mr. Murray’s case is lost, then expect new attacks on the freedom of speech. The “regulation” has already been voiced, in context of being ‘good, trusted, approved, mainstreem’. Everyone who wants to speak publicly will be licensed, the rest will be censored.

      This system will spawn two polar camps. You will not have truly independent media outlets ready to report events impartially. There will be a dual info-sphere, where everyone knows their role in advance and has a set of stereotyped reactions. You will have the state newspaper Pravda and underground anti-government Samizdat. That simplified media sphere.
      As the husband of Ksenia Sobchak wrote, there’s already too little room for a complex person, today.

    • TonyN

      You are right about the tortuous level of bias in her dealings with this case. It is distincly whiffy, and she deserves censure from the Supreme Court.

      Thank God she is restricted to lording it over less than 10% of the British public.

      Frankly, her actions point to the fact that ‘Scottish Law’ is now as silly an affectation as that pretendy-parliament.

      • Alf Baird

        “Frankly, her actions point to the fact that ‘Scottish Law’ is now as silly an affectation as that pretendy-parliament.”

        Perhaps, although the legal establishment in Scotland which aye sits in the auld pairlament itsel has its status and privileges enshrined and protected in the treaty of union itself which constituted the UK alliance, unlike that which exists doon at Holyrood. The difference in ‘power’ between these two institutions of state was well illustrated during the toothless Fabiani ‘redaction and amnesia’ enquiry. That which exists up in Parliament Square is therefore arguably where the real (and unelected) power in Scotland lies and has done since 1707, keeping the natives in check, though its ultimate allegiance remains open to question; fowk cannae ser twa maisters efter aw, thay aye luve ane an laithe the ither.

  • Jeff Lever

    Alternatively, if her comment is interpreted to be neutral rather than self servingly in support of her harsh sentence, it means that since Craig Murray is not bound by any press industry code, he is bound only by the laws that apply to everyone. In that case, the comparison with the absence of action against the msm remains striking.

    • Tatyana

      Of course striking!
      She sees this as a ‘jigsaw identification’.
      The one who put the blue pieces into the picture goes to jail, and the one who provided the red pieces remains free.
      The judge’s explanation for such selectivity was about their respective positions, due to their respective employments!
      It is the one and the only comment from her on the difference.

  • Piotr+Berman

    “Whatever that may involve, it is relevant to distinguish his position from that of the mainstream press, which is regulated, and subject to codes of practice and ethics in a way in which those writing as the applicant does are not. “

    At the first glance, this is a purely artificial distinction. If the “jigsaw behavior” was decreed to be harmful and/or punishable, why the externality like “being subject of codes and ethics” matters? If anything, folks who were the subjects of those codes violated both the court decree and their codes (assuming that these codes were in any way relevant).

    At the second glance, this is a distinction between nobles and commoners. As the commerce was increasing in 19-th century, traffic incidents became a problem and punishments for reckless driving were enacted. Now suppose that in the royal city of Edinburgh two horse driven carriages went out of control, resulting in trampling a maiden (or a matron), not necessarily on the same day. The question was if they should be punished for being reckless.

    The first carriage belongs to a noble, and nobles swear to a code of noble behavior, defense of innocents etc., so we can conclude that the carriage was not operated recklessly. A sad accident to be sure, but not reckless.

    The second carriage belongs to a commoner, so we can conclude that he was reckless, as it is, sadly, expected for folks of that ilk, the intended subjects of stern lows about reckless driving. (I read about the historical parts because I follow news items about bicyclists, and a bicyclist in London was sentenced, for two years in a gaol, if I recall, for reckless driving.)

    Similarly, to evaluate the recklessness, we need to consider the status of the victim who could contribute to the incident (in Craig’s case, by blabbing to a journalist). Same criteria can be used, a victim of good repute surely did not contribute. Feudalism provides tools to resolve such questions simply and quickly.

    • Giyane


      Now you’re talking!
      As in England, feudalism has been replaced by few-dalism, rule by the disgustingly rich 1%. These stinky rich types want all the perks of the old feudalists , but without the common sense.

      It is the gratuitous petty nastiness of Sturgeon and Dorrian, Duncan- Smith and Pritti Patel that irks. While
      I believe the cyclist that was locked up in London had no brakes.

      • Piotr+Berman

        I believe that the bicycle was OK, but it was a speed bike with rear breaks only. The judge considered using this type of bike to be reckless, and that is wrong. Rear breaks are sufficient when in good condition, but if a bicyclist goes fast and breaks too rapidly, then he goes flying, potentially spearing the victim with his head, and since the fatal danger is in falling down banging pavement with the head, it is pretty equivalent. In other words, you cannot reduce the stopping distance too much. Non-reckless biking in the vicinity of humans, cattle etc. require to look ahead sufficiently and react well in time, or going slow if a sufficient look-ahead is not possible.

        • Alf Baird

          The problem is perhaps less a matter of class within a colonial reality where the colonized cannot expect anything from the justice system even when administered by a native elite of the same ‘skin’ (Fanon); colonialism provides for a double layer of oppression as it were in which the colonizer (internal or external) will always maintain the inferiority and lower status of the colonized, below even that of tabloid journalists. As Albert Memmi explains:

          “The calcified colonized society is therefore the consequence of two processes having opposite symptoms; encystment originating internally and a corset imposed from outside. Both phenomena have one common factor, contact with colonization. They converge in the social and historical catalepsy of the colonized.”

          • Piotr+Berman

            Coming from a different part of Europe, I have a simpler view. There are wider aspects of societies, regardless of colonial status or the lack of it. Elites are formed, and part of the government purpose is to keep them “up here” and the rest “down there”. I must stress that governments have many functions or purposes, but this is one of them.

            Journalists as such are subservient folks, but what they write or say is decided by their employers and owners of their outfits (or they are speedily fired, sometimes not-so speedily). Thus their actions are the actions of the elite. For Lady Dorian, that means that their actions are OK, barring a VERY RIGOROUS proof to the contrary (as it happened in England in some rag that belonged to an Australian). Craig is just a middle class person — there were some articles disclosing that he is not living in a hovel, AS HE SHOULD, but clearly, he does not live in a manor and his work is not approved by someone living in a manor.

            The only colonial aspect that I see is that the justification of the sentence and unequal treatment that we discussed was not elegantly obfuscated, something to be expected in the metropolis, but requiring skills lacking in the peripheral areas.

    • Tatyana

      Piotr, appreciate your story!
      My comparison is much simplier and less decent. I apologize in advance for choosing a subject, this is due to the fact that I write from my own perspective. The story could be:

      Imagine I would sell hand-made wooden penises.
      A passer-by might find that extremely offensive. They might go to the court to have me banned from making it.
      I would argue that wooden penises are mass-produced and even the next counter at the same week-end Fair sell it, factory-made.
      The judge would give me 8 months in prison, while leaving the sex-shop in the market.
      The judge explains that the manufactured products are subject to ethics and codes that I, an individual crafter, do not comply with.
      That being said, there is no evidence that anyone was harmed while using my wooden penises. Quite the opposite, I’ve got many happy customers who support my small business.

      Mods, please delete if it’s too indecent. Thank you 🙂

      • Laszlo

        Tatyana, I sincerely hope Russian women don’t have to resort to wooden penises. Other then that, its brill!

        • Tatyana

          I have to admit that sometimes Russian women might resort to non-standard methods of solving everyday problems…
          But I doubt that my proposed fictional product would have any profitability in the local market, since the quantity of , ahem, organic products – any color / size / condition / number of functions – exceeds the expectations of the most picky consumer.

          • Laszlo

            Fair enough. After all its all about honesty, at least on this site, isn’t it?

          • Tatyana

            Of course it’s about honesty!
            You see, as a good artist I work from nature and reproduce a living model in wood. To protect the anonymity of my sitters, I resort to styling.
            At our virtual hearing, the judge accused me that the stylization was not sufficiently simplified, which is why the device of Mr. A, Mr. B and Mr. C can be identified by the general public.
            I argued that only a very small circle of people familiar with living models can actually identify them.

            Then the judge said that I still go to jail for a violation of ethics, because in factories penises are made with a solemn face, and I allow myself to grin, laugh and make witty jokes while working.

  • Carrots

    On the plus side you weren’t “lawfully killed”… the best way to stop someone detonating a suicide vest being to drag away the people who have him in custody and are restraining him. And then shoot at the explosives he’s thought to be wearing. Followed by a whole load more bullets 10 minutes later when he turns out not to be dead…

    • Kempe

      Worse still they shot him with a Taser. Surely the most stupid thing to do to someone you suspect is wearing a suicide belt.

  • Carl

    Polling showed mainstream press were the source of all identification of complainants in the Salmond case. Several of them flagrantly violated their professional code. So what does Lady Dorrian mean by saying the mere existence of that code should shield them from prosecution, even those who transgressed most boldly? I don’t understand.

    Has there been any attempt in MSM to impose meaning on what she wrote and to defend it?

  • Athanasius

    It has been my experience that the more “respectable” a journalist, the higher up the food chain, the more esteemed his publication, the less trustworthy he is. I would give credence to a Sun journalist before the Times or Guardian (ESPECIALLY the Guardian) leader writer.

  • Simon

    So is this whole thing just a reaction to one blogger who needs to be put in his place or is it a symptom of a wider problem for the British state?

    Let’s face it, they are taking an awful risk here. This could seriously backfire, so the stakes must be high. Is it simply Independence? Or is it a more general play, as Tatyana states, for the media sphere? I have no knowledge of how easy it is to implement an authoritarian societal system but that seems like a good place to start.

    • Tatyana

      Pretty easy.
      You have to take the most basic human instinct – the instinct of self-preservation – and turn it on. This is most easily achieved by an external threat pretext.
      Then your ‘herd’ will unite more closely, turn on the alarm mode, activate the ‘friend or foe’ sensor system and greet a strong brutal leader. Such a leader is not asked uncomfortable questions. All the resources of the ‘herd’ are spent on security, and any expenses and actions are justified by it.

      Too many societies too often were subjected to this. You may recognise some signs in your country today. Ask yourself, is it true that some humans are labelled due to their ‘foreignship’? Does your government say they are a threat to your country? Do they say you all must unite to stand against that threat? Do they say you must be more controlled and spend more on police and military?

      If so, please remember a Tatyana with funny wooden penises. I’m definitely NOT an enemy of yours 🙂

      You may like to watch ‘Experiment Wave’ film (Die Welle by Dennis Gansel) to see even more easy methods.

      • Ron Soak

        “Ask yourself, is it true that some humans are labelled due to their ‘foreignship’? Does your government say they are a threat to your country? Do they say you all must unite to stand against that threat? Do they say you must be more controlled and spend more on police and military?”

        An excellent specific example of a general practice where those categorised with specific labels are treated more or less favourably depending upon where that label fits within whatever hierarchy is operating.

        One might even say a more accurate descriptive terminology would use the word “identity” rather than label in he above context. But that would be opening a real can of worms.

    • Jimmy Riddle

      Simon – of course it is not just one blogger.

      They clearly want *all* journalism to be state regulated, nothing may be published unless it is approved of by the Ministry of Truth.

      The whole point is that they have almost achieved this and the example of the Salmond case shows just how close they are. In the Salmond case, *all* the main-stream media published *exactly* what they were supposed to publish – and they all omitted the *entire* defence argument.

      The only reasonably full factual accounts of the defence arguments came from Craig Murray and also (to a lesser extent) Grouse Beater.

      So (a) they want *all* news that is broadcast to be approved by the Ministry of Truth and (b) they are almost home in enforcing this – look at how few accounts of the defence argument in the Salmond case there actually were.

      Assange is another example – they manipulated the COVID situation to ensure that there was as little reporting as possible of the Assange case. The main stream media all seem to have toed the line on that one too.

      So they’re almost there – Dorrian’s judgement (if they can get away with it) will set the precedent that they are looking for.

  • John

    Unbelievably criminal double standards that no real judge could possibly countenance. How on earth did she get that job?

  • Jm

    There is a stark correlation between the need for a wholly controlled media that serves the Establishments aim for total narrative control and the plummeting circulation figures for said media.

    Ironically it seems the Establishment will only be happy with their totally controlled media as the public lose all faith in it.

    That does not make for a healthy and balanced society.

  • Baron

    You’re being punished for actively (and successfully) promoting independent Scotland (just as Alex Salmond got taken to court for joining the RT channel), in both cases the official charges were just convenient proxies, totally irrelevant.

  • Louis Celine

    Craig, you keep on using your past ” titles”

    “former senior diplomat, British Ambassador and University Rector”

    This is not a good indicator. Tony Blair is a former prime minister as he is a shameless person.
    Former this or that means nothing. It is past, gone, arrivederci. Do not use it to support your position. It is not making you stronger but the opposite.

    • lysias

      Craig is also being targeted because he had the nerve to refute such Deep State fictions as Russiagate and Salisbury.

    • Giyane

      Louis Celine

      Most nasty behaviour stems from jealousy, so it’s a good idea to keep reminding your persecutors what they are jealous of in case they think , as Sturgeon does , that she is fulfilling a missionary role in reversing common sense in Scotland.

    • Marmite

      Unless I have missed something, I think his point was that these titles are part of the problem with Britain, and I’d agree with that. In Britain, there is this strange idea that your title entitles you to some kind of higher ground. The wise person knows that the higher ground is actually obtained by renouncing all the bullshit.

  • yesindyref2

    I don’t know why, but this seems somehow apt, though it might be the SiFi version that is more appropriate.

    Below the thunders of the upper deep,
    Far, far beneath in the abysmal sea,
    His ancient, dreamless, uninvaded sleep
    The Kraken sleepeth: faintest sunlights flee
    About his shadowy sides; above him swell
    Huge sponges of millennial growth and height;
    And far away into the sickly light,
    From many a wondrous grot and secret cell
    Unnumbered and enormous polypi
    Winnow with giant arms the slumbering green.
    There hath he lain for ages, and will lie
    Battening upon huge sea worms in his sleep,
    Until the latter fire shall heat the deep;
    Then once by man and angels to be seen,
    In roaring he shall rise and on the surface die.

  • Sayless

    Is writing to an English MP still a good way to apply pressure regarding this? Can MPs in non-Scottish areas challenge these corrupt actions in Scotland? Or should English voters write to a Scottish body?

    • SA

      Also explains how, not only the US and U.K. government as well as many ‘establishment’ journalists spend so much time and effort telling us that Assange is not a journalist. You now have to have an official seal of approval to be a journalist and have the privilege of not being jailed for expressing your views if they are not approved.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.