Keeping Freedom Alive 916

I want to make one or two points for you to ponder while I am in jail. This is the last post until about Christmas; we are not legally able to post anything while I am imprisoned. But the Justice for Craig Murray Campaign website is now up and running and will start to have more content shortly. Fora and comments here are planned to stay open.

I hope that one possible good effect of my imprisonment might be to coalesce opposition to the imminent abolition of jury trials in sexual assault cases by the Scottish Government, a plan for which Lady Dorrian – who wears far too many hats in all this – is front and centre. We will then have a situation where, as established by my imprisonment, no information at all on the defence case may be published in case it contributes to “jigsaw identification”, and where conviction will rest purely on the view of the judge.

That is plainly not “open justice”, it is not justice at all. And it is even worse than that, because the openly stated aim of abolishing juries is to increase conviction rates. So people will have their lives decided not by a jury of their peers, but by a judge who is acting under specific instruction to increase conviction rates.

It is often noted that conviction rates in rape trials are too low, and that is true. But have you ever heard this side of the argument? In Uzbekistan under the Karimov dictatorship, when I served there, conviction rates in rape trials were 100%. In fact very high conviction rates are a standard feature of all highly authoritarian regimes worldwide, because if the state prosecutes you then the state gets what it wants. The wishes of the state in such systems vastly outweigh the liberty of the individual.

My point is simply this. You cannot judge the validity of a system simply by high conviction rates. What we want is a system where the innocent are innocent and the guilty found guilty; not where an arbitrary conviction target is met.

The answer to the low conviction rates in sexual assault trials is not simple. Really serious increases in resources for timely collection of evidence, for police training and specialist units, for medical services, for victim support, all have a part to play. But that needs a lot of money and thought. Just abolishing juries and telling judges you want them to convict is of course free, or even a saving.

The right to have the facts judged in serious crime allegations by a jury of our peers is a glory of our civilisation. It is the product of millennia, not lightly to be thrown away and replaced by a huge increase in arbitrary state power. That movement is of course fueled by current fashionable political dogma which is that the victim must always be believed. That claim has morphed from an initial meaning that police and first responders must take accusations seriously, to a dogma that accusation is proof and it is wrong to even question the evidence, which is of course to deny the very possibility of false accusation.

That is precisely the position which Nicola Sturgeon has taken over the Alex Salmond trial; to be accused is to be guilty, irrespective of the defence evidence. That people are oblivious to the dangers of the dogma that there should be no defence against sexual assault allegations, is to me deeply worrying. Sexual allegation is the most common method that states have used to attack dissidents for centuries, worldwide and again especially in authoritarian regimes. Closer to home, think of history stretching from Roger Casement to Assange and Salmond.

Why would we remove the only barrier – a jury of ordinary citizens – that can stop abuse of state power?

I am worried that this abolition of juries will have been enacted by the Scottish Parliament, even before I am out of jail. I am worried Labour and the Lib Dems will support it out of fashionable political correctness. I am worried an important liberty will disappear.

I want to touch on one other aspect of liberty in my own imprisonment that appears not understood, or perhaps simply neglected, because somehow the very notion of liberty is slipping from our political culture. One point that features plainly in the troll talking points to be used against me, recurring continually on social media, is that I was ordered to take down material from my blog and refused.

There is an extremely important point here. I have always instantly complied with any order of a court to remove material. What I have not done is comply with instructions from the Crown or Procurator Fiscal to remove material. Because it is over 330 years since the Crown had the right of censorship in Scotland without the intervention of a judge.

It sickens me that so many Scottish Government backed trolls are tweeting out that I should have obeyed the instructions of the Crown. That Scotland has a governing party which actively supports the right of the Crown to exercise unrestrained censorship is extremely worrying, and I think a sign both of the lack of respect in modern political culture for liberties which were won by people being tortured to death, and of the sheer intellectual paucity of the current governing class.

But then we now learn that Scotland has a government which was prepared not only to be complicit in exempting the Crown from climate change legislation, but also complicit in hushing up the secret arrangement, so I am not surprised.

What is even more terrifying in my case is that the Court explicitly states that I should have followed the directions of the Crown Office in what I did and did not publish, and my failure to not publish as the Crown ordered is an aggravating factor in my sentencing.

If the Crown thinks something I write is in contempt and I think it is not, the Crown and I should stand as equals in court and argue our cases. There should be no presumption I ought to have obeyed the Crown in the first place. That Scottish “justice” has lost sight of this is disastrous, though perhaps as much from stupidity as malice.

My next thought on my trial is to emphasise again the dreadful doctrine Lady Dorrian has now enshrined in law, that bloggers should be held to a different (by implication higher) standard in law than the mainstream media (the judgement uses exactly those terms), because the mainstream media is self-regulated.

This doctrine is used to justify jailing me when mainstream media journalists have not been jailed for media contempt for over half a century, and also to explain why I have been prosecuted where the mainstream media, who were provably responsible for far more jigsaw identification, were not prosecuted.

This is dreadful law, and my entire legal team are frankly astonished that the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal on this point. This excellent article by Jonathan Cook explains further the chilling implications.

Those articles which the Court ordered me to take down, have been taken down. But I was not ordered to take down this one, which was found not to be in contempt of court. I was also not ordered to take down my affidavits, which though slightly redacted are still extremely valuable. I swore to the truth of every word and I stick by that. At the time I published these, far less was known about the Salmond affair than is known now, and I believe you will find it well worth reading them again in the light of your current state of wider knowledge – absolutely nothing to do with learning identities, but to do with what really happened on the whole plot to destroy Alex Salmond (something the judgement states I am allowed to say).

Finally I urge you to consider this truly remarkable speech from Kenny MacAskill MP. Scotland’s former Justice Secretary, and consider its quite staggering implications. It tells you everything you want to know about the British Establishment’s capture of the Scottish government, that the mainstream media felt no need to report the main points he was making, which constitute a simply astonishing outline of corrupt abuse of power.

An explanation: this blog is going dark because I cannot by law publish from prison or conduct a business from prison. Access to this blog has always been free and open and subscriptions have always been a voluntary contribution and not a purchase. It is understood that all new and continuing subscriptions from today, until we go live again, are voluntary contributions to the welfare of my family and not in exchange for anything.

I am afraid one off contributions to the defence fund are also still urgently needed. Legal costs so far paid amount to over £200,000 and continue to rise as we head towards the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which has to be via another Scottish Court called the nobile officium. Astonishingly, over 13,000 individuals from over 120 countries have contributed to the legal defence fund. People all over the world value freedom and realise the terrible precedents established by this case must be overturned.

We are equally grateful for all donations and all really do help – donations of £5 or less total over £30,000. But I must mention the special generosity of Roger Waters and Vivienne Westwood, and the anonymous individual who gave one bitcoin. 80% of the fund is reserved for legal fees, but up to 20% may be used to fund campaigning to raise public and political awareness of the human rights issues involved.

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


Subscription to this blog has always been voluntary and anyone is free to read and reproduce without subscribing. These subscriptions have become the major source of income to myself and my family, and I am especially grateful to those who have maintained their subscriptions when it has not been really functioning. I shall be immensely happy if you can continue until I am back. The struggle continues after this holiday.

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

Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments will be closed on October 2, 2021.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

916 thoughts on “Keeping Freedom Alive

1 2 3 8
  • Susan Forrest

    This whole thing is a travesty – of justice, of human rights, of government

    Please take care Craig – there are so many people out here supporting you and campaigning for you, just look after yourself and we will look after you and your family

    Thank you for all you have done to shine a light on this disgusting Scottish Government & their hold on the courts (or is it vice versa?)

    Your blog may temporarily going dark, but your light will continue to shine brightly, because it shines with truth & honour

  • David G

    Dreadful. I’ll be checking the justice site for news, and look forward to seeing you back here in a few months with more of your interesting perspectives and vital reporting.

    Good luck, Craig.
    Good luck, Nadira and family

    – David Glatstein
    New York City

    • David G

      I just want to add that having read all of Craig’s Salmond coverage, I have absolutely no idea who any of the Alphabet Ladies are, or even who the celebrity was at the private dinner that came up in testimony.

      Craig told me nothing about that. But he did inform me that the whole Salmond case was clearly a politically motivated attempted frame or fit-up, and so no matter what they say, it’s obvious that Craig has been imprisoned for what he did do, not what he didn’t.

  • Grhm

    There is no shame in being a political prisoner.
    In fact, there is no higher honour the British state could have bestowed upon you.
    Stay well.

    • Tom Welsh

      It took me a while to absorb your statement, Grhm. Having done so, I realise that I completely agree with you.

      It feels strange to have to agree that being made a knight, a dame, or an earl would be a far lesser accolade than being imprisoned as Mr Murray has.

      But it is true.

      What a horrible reflection on the governments of the UK and the people who staff them.

      • Twostime

        It is horrific but true, will continue to support directly to Craig’s account. My best wishes to his family, stay strong, so many people support Craig.

  • Carolyn Zaremba

    Good luck, Craig. I will be thinking of you and definitely making a further donation in your cause. Jonathan Cook’s article is great and I have shared it on FB, as well. We all know why this is being done to you.

  • Peter Mo

    Will be interesting if Craig is “obstructed” from entering the police station.

    Craig’s lawyers in framing his appeal should have stressed the uniqueness, unprecedented and untried nature of the law. To have one judge whose credentials don’t read well establish a precedent for future cases is undemocratic, unethical and just plain unreasonable. It degrades the UK system of law. A fillip for those who believe far too many lawyers are getting into politics which is a worldwide problem. Obviously the links between executive and judicial are far too close.

  • BrianFujisan

    Nadira and The Kids will be ok…You Need to Know That
    PLAN Doune next year…


    Love YOU MAN

  • josh R

    “…jury of their peers…”

    No brainer, you would’ve thought, at least for anything deemed “serious” & therefore not within the remit of magistrates beholden to the Crown & their own individual inadequacies.

    But then the same goes for Freedom of Speech (within the confines of domestic law – slander, libel, incitement/threat of violence, etc.), Freedom of Association & religious practice (wearing whatever you like & congregating wherever you like), Freedom from Torture, Freedom from Arbitrary Detention, Freedom from the Scourge of War & illegal military/economic wars of Aggression, Freedom from medical experimentation without consent, Freedom from warrantless search/surveillance….. Freedom to Dissent.

    I’m sure I’ve missed a few ‘freedoms’ but, off the top of my head, I can’t think what others are left…. Freedom to do as you’re bloody well told, I suppose.

    If it walks, talks & stinks like fascism….. then I guess it’s just benevolent concern for our health, security & well being by those who have such a distinguished track record of selflessly giving a shit about us.

    Maybe Craig ought to get a tat whilst he’s banged up, “When freedom is outlawed, only outlaws are free”. A bit of ink & the nickname “The Ambassador” would make for an interesting spell in pokey, I almost wish I was there.

    Hope Craig got a good send off today, with folk venturing into the ‘real’ world to wish him well, aside from the support shown him in the ‘virtual’ world.


    “But I was not ordered to take down this one (Yes Minister Fan Fiction)”

    Having read all of Murray’s articles on the subject & utterly failed to identify anyone (I’m still keen to know who the lying toe rag was who perjured herself, saying she was attacked at Bute House when she blatantly & demonstrably wasn’t even there), I had kind of assumed this article must have been the one that got Murray into trouble, ‘cos it mentioned job titles which I thought must have some relevance. But it isn’t, so an utter shitshow of a travesty of justice is even more so……absolutely beggars belief.

    Ah well….. wonder what’s on the telly.

  • U Watt

    Even a juryless trial wasn’t enough for them to get the job done. Dorrian and the ‘supreme’ court had to mangle intellectual logic in order to crowbar you inside.

    The MSM outlets that were responsible for jigsaw identification could not be prosecuted because they had apparently safely self regulated themselves, contrary to all the evidence of public surveys …. Craig Murray was guilty even though it couldn’t be specified exactly how and despite his blog not being cited as a source of jigsaw identification, other than by a couple of ludicrous 77th Brigade trolls.

    The Scottish and UK administrations were desperate in their vengefulness and didn’t care how illogical they looked. They bet right in suspecting that the travesty would simply be ignored by fearless, adversarial outlets like the BBC, Guardian and C4 News, (furthestmost boundaries of permissible dissent in 21c UK.)

    So they finally got you in but in so doing have cemented your place among the pantheon and further embellished your status as a true dissident to the high most criminals of Scotland, London and beyond. God bless.

    • Mighty Druken

      Some things fail in their own logic and are obviously bollocks (please excuse my French)
      Allowing the MSM more leeway because they are self regulated makes no sense. Therefore the stated reason is a lie.

      Of course the real reason is because this ruling by Lady Dorrian is very troublesome when reporting certain trials and the ruling would be opposed by the MSM. By allowing them to report to a different standard, they can rest easy and not have to associate themselves with a truth seeker and human rights activist. This is eerily similar to Julian’s case though that was reported by some in the MSM as possibly troubling.

      I find it difficult to explain how this result stands before the Supreme Court without them looking into it. I can easily see how reporting of a trials becomes risky as you may be jailed because someone else publishes something. My only explanation for the Supreme Court ignoring this issue, is because this time the “right type of troublemaker” was held in contempt. If this situation arises again but it was a MSM journalist I expect they would be suddenly very interested in severely limiting jigsaw identification.

  • Allan Howard

    I think we can be 100% certain that without a jury, Alex would have been found guilty!

    And, that WITH a jury Craig would have been found innocent.

    Take care, and stay positive.

  • alan

    My thoughts and prayers are with you and your family.

    Your persecutors do not have an ounce of your moral fibre Mr Murray

  • Jim Morris

    Reading with horror, the word Diplock came to mind, a form of which is still current in Northern Ireland. We are more than ever a colony.

  • John Monro

    Hello Craig, You know, I really didn’t think it would come to this – I was wrong and you, unfortunately, were right. So I’m so sorry this has happened to you. But we know from Assange, and I should have realised, the UK state, and that obviously includes Scotland, is capable of serious retribution with which the judiciary sometimes is complicit. It isn’t always, for instance, in the court deciding against Johnson’s prorogation. But in dealing to difficult people like you, the powers can often select who they know to be sympathetic to their cause to try their troublesome citizens. In your case, Lady Doran obviously fits the bills, a Judge willing to abandon jury trial for some of the most difficult cases dealt with in court is a judge whose own judgement is obviously seriously impaired, because it should be obvious to any self-aware person that twelve heads are better than one – a jury will bring experience of life in all its manifold experiences twelve-fold whereas what experience of life do most judges accumulate in the coal face of ordinary life? And isn’t that the whole point of jury trial? The people truly judging the accused are his or her peers, not some Peer in fancy costume who literally lords it over all the other minions in their courtrooms. For a judge to consider she must take over that responsibility is to fly in the face of justice, and indicates a level of arrogance that should disbar Lady Doran from ever taking another trial. The fact that rape and sexual assault cases are hard is more of a reason to have jury trials, not the opposite. So, I am really sorry. I live in New Zealand, 12,000 miles away from you, but I doubt whether any resident of your beautiful country could be more angry and upset and ashamed than I am. Take care, you will be buoyed I hope by all the expressions of good will from those reading and posting here, you family (and my best wishes to them) and many thousands of dismayed fellow countrymen. Your courage is exemplary – a martyrdom to truth. I trust you’ll be well cared for in your incarceration and you will come out an even stronger man than when you entered.

    • John Cleary


      What you say about Dorrian is only the half of it. She’s another one of those freaks who didn’t go to a normal school, so she’s had absolutely NO contact with real people and NO real life experiences. I doubt she’s even had any sex herself during her long and unremarkable life.

      • John Monro

        Yes, well, I was just generalising about the likely life experience of many judges. In regard to Lady Dorrian personally, I had no idea. Her Wikipage isn’t particularly informative – I suppose Cranleigh School is a private one, an indication presumably some wealth in the parents and something of a privileged upbringing for the daughter?. In regard to her sex life, I would be inclined to make no judgement and I’m not sure it’s a worthy subject for discussion.

        • John Cleary

          John, as regards your last point.

          If the enemy was abiding by the Queensbury rules I would tend to agree with you. After all, as a normal person you have been raised on fair play, decency and tolerance.

          In general, you have no idea of the malevolence of the opposition. I have.

          Specifically for this Dorrian women. Apart from what she tried to do to Salmond (by excluding important evidence of the conspiracy) and what she has now done to Craig, she is at the forefront of an attempt to remove the protection of a jury of one’s peers.

          Let me quote Lord Devlin:

          trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution: it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives

          Are you sure you wish to play the knight gallant for this woman?

          Are you sure her sex life is no worthy subject when she would make herself the sole arbiter of a dispute between man and woman? With life-ending powers?

  • Nickle101

    Very sorry for your plight Craig. Unfortunately this was a slow train coming.
    You can count on our continued support.
    Wishing you and you family the best under these terrible circumstances.

  • DunGroanin

    Godspeed you through this unjust ordeal Craig Murray, I would gladly serve your sentence to preserve your health.

    The Crowns Facist Scary Clown Face is showing now – behind the cuddly lil old lady facade one.

    When she drops dead and the people collectively shrug and say ‘what was the big deal? Why were we so infatuated with such Jurassic phantoms?’ The current and future generations will be free of didactic subservience to the self declared ‘Betters’ (because they learnt some ‘Latin’! a dead language in its own homeland centuries ago!)

    The trial without jury of accused rapists is, in my opinion, not in anyway different to the 1930’s NAZI othering and vilification of Judaism – where a mere accusation was enough to destroy a person, a family, their wealth and ultimately their life, through immediate incarceration and extermination .

    Appealing to protect ‘our’ precious innocent feminine & LGBT ‘purity’ against some imaginary male ONLY predators is just the latest mask to hide the skeletal mad cackling features of the ancient voracious Crown and its jackals.

    If the Scottish judiciary and its employees had ANY self respect and personal principle – they would down tools and STRIKE against the utter injustice of their profession.

    The same for the English counterparts. I wonder aloud about judges – who judges the judges? I’m sure there is a Latin phrase that would express it better.

    May the pans rattle loud on the bars inside and in the crowds outside as we mount a daily vigil as you bear the burden of Fighting The Power and not letting the modern day Herods of the Crown wash their hands!

    Being Sunday – a quick prayer.
    Ullululululu! Let us rush to the hero who defends us from our oppressors and bears the burden alone today – raise a cacophony that will travel through the walls of our prisons and fake media worm tongues – stand together. Don’t be divided by our gender by these who want us to fight amongst ourselves and avoid us punching ‘upwards’ towards their celestial heights , let this Man’s example start the final steps of burrows and bring down their castles built on our subservience and their violent terror.

    • Cynicus

      “who judges the judges? I’m sure there is a Latin phrase that would express it better.”

      You are right : Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

      Not bad for “…a dead language in its own homeland centuries ago!”

      • DunGroanin

        Sorry if you missed the sarc. Your Latin is as good as mine!

        Do you have an answer to the question – in English please.

  • Peter Moritz

    Another good man goes to prison.
    Unfortunately his is not news anymore. And it seems there is like in the US nothing that can be done anymore.
    What a travesty of a justice system.

  • vin_ot

    Jonanthan Cook is spot on as ever. Yourself and Julian Assange are the canaries in the coalmine for this new age of ruthless repression of dissent. The draconian new measures sought by people like Biden, Patel and Sturgeon are a response to the decay of their unjust system (or in Nicola and Peter’s case to growing awareness of their grand deceit and outright criminality). They are vulnerable. They cannot turn back the clock to the glad, confident morning of neoliberalism or of Murrellism so dissent must be crushed and erased in the crudest fashion. I am confident it will rebound on them.

  • Robert Graham

    Best of luck Craig , The State through its handmaiden Sturgeon has one by one has gone after Indy Supporters with the help of their placement Sturgeon she is being protected by the Security Services because she really is a valuable asset and has done more damage than Bawjaws could ever hope for,

    A very very long list of people should be at the head of the Queue for incarceration this morning well in front of you Craig beginning with that snake and her pretend husband who are resident in Bute House .

    Again another victim of the state and Sturgeon hasn’t batted a eyelid she was hoping it was Alex but a Jury with a majority of honest Women spoiled her Plan .

  • nevermind

    We wish you well and ensure that your family is getting what their need. Shall continue to support your case and if it means selling my motorbike, so be it.
    I have spoken up yesterday against the police crime, sentencing and courts bill yesterday, designed to keep the 1% status quo and the city of London corp. alive and well whilst everything around them crumbles and causes discontent.
    Its designed to keep people off the streets and those who do speak up will be harassed with its powers when speaking up, just as you have.
    The whole of the UK is entering a dark state of affairs.
    I will continue to highlight the ignorance of this Government and establishment to the life’s of us, the sovereign majority, the people of this country.
    We will be looking in on Nadira for a cuppa within the next three weeks, as we will on family and friends. Lastly I hope you get a friendly cell mate to talk to. Good luck my friend, our thoughts are with you.

  • Jennifer Allan

    A historic blog. Your words will haunt the broken Scottish justice system and the judiciary for long after your release from jail. Take care in jail; they can stop you blogging, but they cannot stop you writing. To your lovely family-stay strong. It won’t be long.

  • J Galt

    I was never much interested in “who” these people were and you certainly did not help me identify them.

    I was more interested in “what” they were and what they represented, and your work certainly laid that bare.

    Having just turned 60 myself and recovering from a bout of bad health earlier in the year I wouldn’t like to be facing what you are facing, however I hope that the experience will strengthen your resolve and not do too much damage to your physical health.

    Good luck sir and all the best to your family.

  • Jm

    I think it highly ironic,in light of Dorrian’s mangled doctrine,that the only person showing genuine journalistic ability was you while the supposed “real” journalists were simply state stenographers-or worse.

    What an abysmal travesty of justice,absolutely abysmal.

  • wontbegrinningsoon

    An excellent and thought provoking post from Mr Murray. The Jonathan Cook article, also very helpful in understanding the issues. What I don’t get is why the MSM is so protected by the state.

    • Tom+Welsh

      They have a symbiotic relationship, although strictly speaking the MSM is parasitic on the state – which is parasitic on the people.

      Of course the state shelters and protects the MSM, which serves it faithfully and carefully avoids publishing anything that might offend the powers that be.

      Very cosy and profitable for all involved.

    • Shatnersrug

      Because newspapers can no longer survive on the ad revenues. So they are supported from grants and special agreements. That doesn’t come for free

  • Republicofscotland

    I think the fact that Alex Salmond, (Of whom, certain powerful individuals all but thought he’d go to prison and ergo be removed from the political scene in Scotland forever) was found not guilty by a jury of his peers made up mostly of women, has brought this mad rush for sexual assault convictions via juryless trials to the fore.

    Yes individuals who are sexually assaulted deserve justice, however there are folk who are innocent of such crimes, and Salmond’s acquittal proves that, juryless trial will leave the system open to abuse I think.

    Keep safe and well Craig, you’ll be missed.

    • Tom Welsh

      At the root of all this lies the foolish and impracticable idea of granting anonymity to accusers. Harsh as it may seem for their names to be published, it is better than the alternative. Only totalitarian dystopias allow people to be prosecuted and sent to the prison on the “evidence” of anonymous accusers who stand to lose nothing even if they are proven to have lied cynically.

      British justice has always (until very recently) allowed an accused person to confront his or her accusers in open court and hear the evidence they give.

1 2 3 8