**Date for Diaries** Please join us outside HMP Edinburgh on the morning of 30 November 2021 to celebrate Craig’s release from prison. Speech from Craig. All welcome. It’s St Andrews Day – bring your Saltire. #cmcountdown #ScotlandJailsJournalists
— Craig Murray Justice campaign (@cmurrayjustice) November 17, 2021
Craig Murray #CountdownToFreedom series #ScotlandJailsJournalists Peter Oborne, journalist & former political commentator of the Daily Telegraph describes his friend as a hero, truthteller, dissident – https://t.co/MZhxu46YPR pic.twitter.com/hBcd1xj8A2
— Craig Murray Justice campaign (@cmurrayjustice) November 22, 2021
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
Alternatively:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
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:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
“It is often noted that conviction rates in rape trials are too low, and that is true.”
Where does this “truth” come from? Having seen a friend prosecuted due to the woman’s regret, I am well aware that women do lie. As a man, I hope that the low conviction rate stays low. It is better a guilty man goes free, than an innocent man has his life ruined.
The good news is that my friend’s life was not ruined – the CPS dropped the case.
I don’t think it’s that simple. You have to consider the impact on the female involved. Suppose the man is guilty: if he goes free, does that not compound the distress for the woman? There’s also the emotional pain of dragging all the details through court, having her character and behaviour analysed and dissected in front of a room full of witnesses. And if the man is free to do the same again to another woman, then surely that would lump additional weight on the negative side on this utilitarian scale. So it’s not automatically best to take what might seem like the easier and “safer” route of discharging the man with no stain on his reputation if there is strong circumstantial but inconclusive evidence against him.
“Suppose the man is guilty”, yes obviously where the man is guilty but found innocent there are negatives. It is that the opposite case where an innocent man is found guilty has even more serious negatives.
What would help is if we knew the numbers of each. We don’t. We never will. The only statistic I know of, is that rape cases have a lower conviction rate than other crimes. And to appease the baying mob, they have decided that apples must be more like oranges, and should have a similar conviction rate.
And as an aside, another meaningless statistic: in America, 600 women give birth every year without having had sex. Believing women ahead of men might not be the best of ideas.
Heinrich Himmler said something simmler….
IMO – the anonymity clause needs to be related to the completion of due legal process, ie.
If accused found guilty then complainants remain protected.
If accused found innocent then anonymity is removed.
This might assist in filtering out the corrupt and mischievous ?
It is most odd that some would be thinking that to attack the unmasking of unpleasant and inconvenient truths is something to be supported rather than result in revolutionary reaction and stealthy proaction in stalwart defence of such an honourable calling, which is fundamentally natural.
Failed state systems invariably spectacularly fall prey to that simple observation.
Craig’s treatment and the shenanigans of some of those entirely responsible for it have reached a much wider audience via this popular portal ………https://www.zerohedge.com/political/craig-murrays-jailing-latest-move-battle-snuff-out-independent-journalism“>
amanfromMars. Thanks. That piece was a good overview of the points. Craig’s jailing was a watershed in the non coverage my the media. Kenny’s speech in the House of Commons is now a matter of record in Hansard. I hope other parliamentarians like David Davis speak out. The waiting for an ‘answer for Craig is over. He has done no wrong and but for worrying about his family, can sleep with a clear conscience, wake up, do some yoga in that cell and write, without distraction. A fitter fighter on release.
I have not heard any comment from Alex Salmond on this injustice.
If he has made no comment on this vicious decision against Craig I would find that shocking.
Have I missed Mr. Salmond’s pronouncement…?
Tumbleweed ….
Keep on fishin… boys got an itchy trigger finger on the scripts?
I don’t understand your comment. It’s natural to wonder what is the explanation for Salmond’s apparent silence.
For gawdsakes, try and understand this is a LOT bigger than poor CM’s incarceration. Try this:
What if he (AS) was being legally advised about any further legal actions that may being considered and which may become compromised by any comment at this time?
What if CM’s further actions may also be?
Would you back seat kids want to cause that to crash?
My trust is unwavering on both their behalf and others who are involved in this fight against an ever more fascist war.
(Not quite)DunGroanin,
perhaps folk are just wondering if there was a “sorry to hear about…”, “wish him all the best…..”, “grateful for his efforts on my behalf…” type of thing from AS.
Maybe this already happened, I’m a bit out of the loop on this one.
Comments don’t necessarily seem to be demanding a full on political campaign, just some kind words, which wouldn’t seem to compromise anyone.
& it doesn’t seem like an unfair question. If, as seems to be suggested, there has been absolutely no comment on the subject from AS whilst CM was being led away to his cage, that would be odd and would obviously cause people to wonder why.
@ DunGroanin
Quite. Salmond was already taking further legal action against the Scottish Government in relation to his own case. It would be most unwise of him to get involved in a separate case altogether. I think he is right to remain silent.
You still haven’t explained your apparently insulting comment about “fishin'”, “trigger finger”, and “scripts”, but have instead piled on more insults: “For gawdsakes, try and understand […] you back seat kids”.
You appear to think you can read minds, but you should try the more modest objective of learning to read comments first.
Twirlip just look at the scripts being enacted right here.
You may be an innocent and I will respond to you because I am happy to believe the best in most. Others, not as much.
The Instantaneous FACT of the injustice of CM’s kangaroo trial and incarceration is being attempted to be subverted by a nonsensical ‘whatabouterry’ of AS.
It is victim blaming Because the defender who came to their aid and got murdered by the same assailant. So it’s the initial victims responsibility!
Bull shit. Why divert the focus from the injustice infront of your eyes? Are you saying CM shouldn’t have intervened? Are the others? Crass.
DunGroanin:
I’m just puzzled. I don’t know nearly enough about the background to jump to conclusions or suggest possible solutions.
Twirlip
You are privileged to have been engaged with by a very serious customer there.
Do not push your luck.
U Watt:
What are you talking about? Your comment sounds quite sinister and nasty. I thought I had eased out of this exasperating subthread, and I saw no need for the conversation to continue. Now you seem to be piling on in some way. Please explain yourself. (Or, if someone else knows what on Earth you’re on about, perhaps they will explain!)
Sometimes the Internet just doesn’t seem worth the bother.
U Watt:
If it was just some sort of obscure in-joke, I hope you will excuse me for not getting it.
I’m just saying, Dungroanin was already sceptical that you are an innocent. Just be careful.
U Watt:
OK, thanks for explaining.
It was Twirlip that tried to get the Kirk involved in supporting Craig.
Twirlip is a good’un
Twirlip
To clarify, I was poking gentle fiun at the pomposity of your interlocutor; somebody who would have us believe Salmond’s public shunning of CM is not only justified but self-evidently so. Anybody who questions the shunning must disingenuous and a troll.
I found it shocking enough that Mr Murray was being denied solidarity by his journalist colleagues and the NUJ, just as Julian Assange was . As Jonathan Cook says, it has confirmed again everything we need to know about mainstream journalists, that their role is to serve establishment interests, not challenge them. As for Alex Salmond, he will probably end up a byword for the lowest forms of dishonour. Walking away from a friend or family member in need will be called Doing a Salmond. What on earth would Walter Scott have made of such a figure?
ronan1882 – on the face of it – yes – but on the other hand, what could Alex Salmond possibly say in addition to what he has already said? His evidence to the Holyrood select committee really was quite comprehensive …. He has made it quite clear that the whole thing against him was a fit-up and that there was a conspiracy, originating at the highest level. I don’t really see what he could possibly add to this.
He could try saying that Lady Dorrian is a big jobby, but we already have a pretty fair idea that this is his opinion on Lady D..
Yes, he could hardly have been more comprehensive or lucid in his defensive of himself. That isn’t what I was referring to, was it? Salmond has maintained total silence on the vindictive prosecution and life-threatening jailing of his great ally Mr Murray, a man who would not be in prison today had Salmond not approached him to fight his corner. Please do not take me and Mr Murray’s other subscribers for idiots.
ronan1882 – OK – so what should Salmond say that he hasn’t already said?
Tell me just one thing he has said about his ally’s prosecution and jailing.
ronan1882 – yes – agreed – this is somewhat strange – but I’m not prepared to write off Alex Salmond yet.
We know that the Crown Office will be examining every word he utters and if he gives them the slightest excuse to pin a charge of jigsaw identification on him, then he’ll be in jail too.
I agree that it is strange, but I don’t know what the game is and for now I’m prepared to give Salmond the benefit of the doubt.
I’m sure iMr Murray is bone weary of the game by this stage.
ronan1882 – yes – this is clear.
@Ronan1882
So you’re blaming Salmond for Craig being in jail? That’s absurd! The last I heard, Salmond’s legal team were preparing to take the SG back to court in relation to his own case. That is a huge job indeed and one which will require absolute focus. To mess it all right up by coming out with personal opinion concerning legal matters in another case would be reckless and potentially catastrophic. Yes, it’s not good what has happened to Craig but, please, Salmond isn’t to blame for him being in jail. And remember, Salmond, whether people liked him or loathed him, was generally widely respected across the board. All of that has been taken from him and his personal character and political reputation have been utterly destroyed. His enemies wanted him to go away for many, many years! That was the aim. Think about that before you start attacking him or blaming him for Craig Murray’s predicament.
Jo1, you should avoid offensively straw-manning what people have written. Nobody here is attacking Alex Salmond. They are rightly confused by his public shunning of CM, a man who has been locked up for his staunch defence of Salmond. Nothing you have written explains Salmond’s public shunning of CM.
@Jimmy Riddle,
“what could Alex Salmond possibly say in addition to what he has already said”…….is the question I raise.
But to date I can find no comment from him…_
DiggerUK – yes – I do agree that he could – and should – say something explicit about Craig Murray’s imprisonment. But I don’t really see how the material content (other than the expression of support) would be in any way different from what he said at the Holyrood enquiry.
Perhaps Mr. Salmond could try something like this.
“I am Mr. Salmond, I think there was a conspiracy to get me banged up.
I was found completely innocent by a jury of my peers.
In my comprehension, this means that the Jury believed my story.
It also means that the jury did not believe the stories of any of the people who made accusations against me.
These accusers have been given anonymity.
I am not sure if this anonymity was just for the period of my trial or if there is a time clause or if their anonymity is the stand for all of time? I feel that there was a very serious attempt to fit me up.
I would like the fitters up to be taken to court but I fear, if I name them, it would again be me in court, facing yet more charges.
There seems to me a denial of natural justice.
This natural justice has also not been given to my friend Craig Murray.
Craig Murray is as honest as the day is long.
In my personal view, Craig Murray has also been fitted up”
DiggerUK / ronan1882 – Are we sure that Alex Salmond is all right? I mean – is he in reasonable health?
I just looked at his twitter account – and the last time he posted anything at all was 22nd June – which is rather strange for the leader of an important political party.
You got 8 months, you’ll do 4, that’s 12 very miserable weeks, but you can tolerate anything for 12 weeks.
Keep your head down, don’t go looking for trouble, but don’t run away from it either or you risk becoming a daily victim. You’ll see plenty that you don’t like inside, but its not your problem, however much that thought goes against the grain.
Good luck and don’t worry too much, assuming they don’t slam you in a cat A you’ll be OK.
Strange months you have there in Scotland 🙂
Here in Russia we have 4 weeks in a month, +2 or 3 extra days every month.
So 4 months make 17 whole weeks + 3 days
That’s British Summer Time for you.
Craig might be eligible for release under Home Detention Curfew after serving a quarter of his sentence – 2 months.
There looks to be only one open prison in Scotland which would be cushier… but it looks to be mainly long term prisoners just before release who are sent there.
There is a stay on prison sentences under a year in Scotland – Craig should have been eligible for home detention from the outset, however as we’ve seen normal rules do not apply to Craig or Julian, who both embarrassed the powerful.
Nicola has done her bit for the establishment alright.
The following website indicates that you may be right:
https://www.sps.gov.uk/Corporate/Information/HomeDetentionCurfew.aspx
Easy for you to say.
I’m sorry they did this to you. Somehow will stop these bullies and they will be exposed.
Appalling.
I wish you all the very best, Craig.
Know that many, many people of all political persuasions and and none (this transcends all that) are behind you in the very valid concerns expressed by you and by Jonathan Cook in his superb article.
To paraphrase Pastor Niemoller:
Yesterday, it was Julian Assange.
Today, it is Craig Murray
Tomorrow, it could be any of us.
Goodness Suhayl haven’t heard from you for years and missed you.
My response to today’s carefully worded inews article on page 21.
Scottish Leviathan justice splits journalism
The appalling lack of evidence allowed in ex Ambassador Murrays contempt of court case as well as the refusal to be judged by a group of peers in a jury stand out from this rotten judgement against the youngest, most lauded and accepted Ambassador’s ever, is reprehensible and wrong.
The media refusal to debate such an important pivotal judgement, when it is his excellent factual journalism reporting from Julian Assange’s court case, the abnormalities of lawful conduct in both cases, as the judgements first ever differentiation between free speech on blogs, and a much compromised and gushingly compliant media on the other hand.
Craig Murray did not mention names, merely random letters of the alphabet, whilst Kirsty Wark, Dani Garavelli and Sky news named but two of the complainants, they have compromised themselves, but the law is blind in one eye it seems. The case against Alex Salmond is finished, but those who perjured themselves should face up to the law, Lady Dorrian’s officiated case failed on lack of evidence, so truth and facts in a rotten, but very close, relationship between Government and the courts in Scotland have been smothered with judicial rigmarole targeting an innocent man who did his utter best to not name anyone. A poll of 5000 people in Scotland attests to that.
That the supreme court rejected an appeal is a mere indication that justice before the law is not equal, that Leviathan justice exists in the 21st century. I for one will be contributing to his defense funds to get justice in an EU court.
Free Craig Murray for he is a responsible journalist, despite a cowering NUJ refusing him accreditation he does not really need in the 21st century.
Whether the inews will publish it is another question. My best to all here and thanks to Tatyana for her humane warm post today.
Like very much. We must fight them wherever we can. Or we are fucked.
You are a brave man Craig Murray. Brought down by people who have twisted every process and procedure and rule, you never stood a chance. Who thought this could happen in Scotland. Somehow we will overcome and we look forwards to having you back on our top team.
As for the Salmond doubters on here, you can be sure that if Alex Salmond is saying nothing it is for a very good reason. He’s not finished yet!
Ms. Nicola Sturgeon has invited Mr. Boris Johnson to a meeting in Bute House when the Prime Minister is in Scotland later this week.
The First Minister has written to Ten Downing Street to discuss the covid recovery plans.
Sturgeon said it was important that they worked together on recovery from the pandemic.
She wrote: “I understand you will be in Scotland later this week and thought this might offer us an opportunity to meet in Edinburgh in person for a discussion on this and that.
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/19485453.nicola-sturgeon-invites-boris-johnson-meeting-bute-house/
Almost friendly.
Boris Johnson had better watch it – if he has a cup of tea and slice of cake with Nicola Sturgeon in Bute House, she’ll probably claim that he tried to rape her just after the Dundee Cake and before they moved onto the port wine. Lady Dorrian will be the sole judge in a trial-without-a-jury and Boris will end up in jail.
@Easily Confused, it seems I am suspected of being a Salmond doubter. I assure you I am not, I have actually seen him in the flesh on RT, I don’t doubt he exists.
What crossed my mind was that I had not heard him say anything about Craig’s trial or jailing. As he is a proper journalist (at least by the good Ladies criteria) with a regular slot on RT, it would seem normal to at least report the proceedings. Having revisited his programmes to check if he has I find nothing.
It also seems surprising that he has tweeted nothing. It cannot be due to ill health because he was fit enough to present his regular show on RT.
RT did carry reports in its news on what has happened to Craig, so I am fairly sure Alex wouldn’t have missed the travesty.
So if we here can speak up in sympathy for Craig without doing any harm to legalities, I don’t see why Alex can’t. It does seem a little ungentlemanly of Alex not to acknowledge Craig’s support…_
Digger, are you seriously suggesting that Alex Salmond should use his slot on RT to defend Craig Murray? Seriously, how naive are you? I cannot think of a single thing that would delight Queen Elizabeth more.
Alex and Craig are in regular contact. I have NO doubt that Alex’s radio silence has been agreed and endorsed by Craig.
I’d rather support our heroes than cut them down for fripperies.
12 dimensional chess by The Master, Alex Salmond. Even one public word of support for Craig Murray would undermine the whole ultra cunning strategy, eh John.
Dom, no.
It’s just simple common sense.
What did Upton Sinclair write?
“It is difficult to get a man to see something when his salary depends on his not seeing it.”
@John Cleary, I see no reason for the absence of any comment from Alex. He does have the protection of being a ‘proper’ journalist according to the good ladies definition of who is a journalist and who isn’t. There are numerous ways he could comment on this travesty of justice against Craig that would not breach any legal rules.
One simple way would be to acknowledge the event along with a few words of comfort for Craig’s family. I see no grounds on which his silence should be accepted, maybe he will comment on RTV this Thursday.
All my original post pointed out was that I had not noticed any comment from Alex, that I found this strange and asked if anybody could show me anything he had said. Some responses are in line with my thoughts on this oddity, other responses appear to be cryptic threats from neotrolls.
Let’s just see if Alex passes any comments on his Twitter account or on this Thursdays Alex Salmond Show on RTV…_
@ DiggerUK
“I see no reason…”
In which case, perhaps we should all be glad you’re not providing AS with legal advice.
supporting a colleague, as Craig did for years with Julian Assange, is not a frippery.
Well, quite. What’s your point?
“I’d rather support our heroes than cut them down for fripperies.”
that’s you. He is not publicly supporting a colleague. Since we both agree that is not a frippery, we can now agree that criticising Salmond for not doing that is not cutting a hero down for a frippery.
pretzel, your logic is indeed pretzel-like.
Have another think about this.
“I don’t see why Alex can’t.”
There is a good reason, DiggerUK. “We” aren’t in Salmond’s position. He is engaged, with his legal team, in bringing further court action against the Scottish Government relating to the investigation carried out by them. He announced this intention back in March this year. With that on-going it would be foolish indeed to get publicly involved in the Murray case. It’s that simple and frankly I think it is wise for him to remain silent.
@Jo1,
There seems to be a tendency by you, and others, to lean towards support for the silence from Alex towards his fellow patriots jailing.
“I don’t see why Alex can’t” speak of his sorrow for Craig being separated from his family, or that he acknowledges all his sterling efforts as a true patriot in the struggle for Scottish Independence, or that he simply looks forward to his release back to freedom in order for him to continue to secure a free Scotland…..But nothing…?
No similar statement could possibly jeopardise any legal proceedings, but they would indeed honour Craig’s contributions to independence and justice….but instead, silence from Alex and mealy mouthed phrases from others.
Still nothing on Alex’s Twitter page, but let’s wait and see what The Alex Salmond Show has to say on Thiursday…_
DiggerUK,
No “tendencies” here. I’m more concerned with yours in that you seem to be seeking to attack Salmond. Why would you do that?
I think it’s entirely possible that Salmond’s legal advisors have told him to stay out of it. We already know that Salmond is bringing his own legal proceedings against the Scottish Government. To get publicly involved in another case would, surely, be a bad move? I certainly think so. Salmond’s character and reputation have been utterly destroyed by what was done to him by his own Party, by the Scottish Civil Service and by the MSM.
It might also be that Salmond has already been in touch with Murray. Do you know different?
What I’m saying is that Salmond is currently attempting to challenge what was done to him and for you to come on to this website and attack him in the way you have, considering the price he has paid, is pretty shocking.
jo1,
do you genuinely find it shocking that people are baffled or unimpressed? there are any number of things salmond could have said publicly without compromising himself in any way.
Alex Salmond didn’t pay the price that Craig is paying, and part of the reason for that, imo, is Craig’s unstinting support and clarification of the issues in the Salmond trial, which handicapped Lady Dorrian in reaching the desired result. But there was no Craig Murray to save Craig Murray, and one would think Salmond still has considerable influence and a wide audience.
You do not appear to understand what is going on.
It was not Craig Murray that saved Alex Salmond. It was the jury of ordinary Scots.
You may not know this, but there was no jury to save Craig Murray. The sentence was passed by Lady Dorrian.
So what should Alex have done to “save” Craig Murray?
you do not appear to understand my post. perhaps, as you wrote, it is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it. Craig’s relentless coverage “handicapped Lady Dorian in reaching the desired result” because she was not as free to manipulate the proceedings as she wanted. hence the payback, and hence the criticism of Salmond.
Well. In the first place Craig reported on two days before Alex Prentice QC threw him out.
Valuable, yes. Relentless, no. Sorry.
Then, she seems to have succeeded in excluding most of the important evidence. But what stopped a conviction was the jury. THEY voted for the innocence of Alex Salmond.
Craig’s efforts did not affect the outcome. But they DID allow outsiders to understand the verdicts of the jury.
In Craig’s case there was no jury. The monster took it upon herself and delivered what her mistress required. So how can Alex “save” him?
It looks to me as though the only thing that will satisfy you is some sort of sackcloth and ashes for Alex Salmond. But Craig does not want that at all. It is YOU that wants that.
WHY?
DiggerUK, you say that no “harm” is being done here by many commenters freely writing about Craig and Alex’s court cases and conduct. However, one person on this BTL section wrote a reply calling Lady Dorrian an unpleasant epithet. I have witnessed a sheriff in a near-identical circumstance, send the contemptuous person to prison for 30 days (a first offender too). DiggerUK you continue to question why Alex Salmond has made absolutely no comment about Craig.
With respect, Alex has legal counsel advising him to be exceedingly circumspect. We have all witnessed the “law” that was deployed in an effort to jail Alex Salmond for most of the rest of his life.
As for BTL comments here on Craig’s website. As a former law officer I know evidence is being ingathered from screenshots of the BTL comments on this Blog.
With respect DiggerUK, Craig Mipurray is in jail and NOBODY should be taking risks that will see his early release after 4 months good behaviour extinguished because someone who has poor knowledge of the law says no “harm” is being done by continual reference to court cases and contemtible abuse of the second most senior law officer in Scotland on these pages.
The wisest move would be to make NO commment about anything to do with Craig’s case or Alex’s case.
There is serious jeopardy occurring. Surely if we have learnt anything this last three years shows uis that Scots Laws has been placed in a questionable position. That will be remedied in the appropriate legal forum. NOT on a random website whose edit is Service a pen 8 month sentence in prison for words written on these very pages.
PLEASE be more careful.
It does make you question the motives of some of Craig’s vociferous “friends” here, and whether they are either very naive or else agents provocateurs.
One wonders how many years Lady Dorrian has been waiting to get her revenge on the Male species. Having personally been used as a square peg in a round hole on more than one occasion , I do tend to think that other people’s racism, even against the Male species is a sign of their madness. Let them die in their rage.
What is Lady Dorrian going to do when locking up Craig Murray fails to assuage her rage against the male species? Maybe lock up every other male on alternate Saturdays until her rage subsides. Purge the male species by making them all wear orange Guantanamo suits in chain gangs? Oh, that one’s already been tried..
Alex Salmond has had his name cleared and so i hope will Craig. If Alex Salmond stuck up for Craig, it would only increase the cathartic effect of encarcerating innocent males.
It’s pretty simple for myself.
Because they couldn’t nail Salmond they have gone for his supporter(s).
The Establishment UK ( not just Scotland ) is in round up the wagons action.
Years ago before ‘ transparency ‘ existed everything was secret ( Defence of The Realm etc) but the PTB are showing us ‘ transparently ‘ as to how they do it – like The Magician’s Tricks Revealed and no-one remembers how they did it.
The MSM will not tell us and the electorate can’t remember either due to a barrage of diversions ( Olympics currently) and the next ‘ event’ is upcoming always.
Johnson’s lies are unquestioned but factored in and the BBC is managing him and the governments terrible policies.
Apparently The Discovery Channel are interested in buying Channel 4 – I didn’t know it was for sale – so make of that what you will.
they may have a connection with GBNews?
Craig you are a good guy which is rare in politics and as some have said hopefully you might do 4 – 5 months so keep your chin up and stay assured that you are one of the good guys ( I’m much more ‘ left ‘ than you ) but like Corbyn good intentions are paramount and in a wicked lying moneymaking world principles can and are being sold by the minute.
The Tories and many in the Labour Party PLP are soul sellers to the bidders ( not necessarily the highest bidders either) and that will continue but stay firm and I’m sure your wife and children will be looked after by your supporters so don’t worry about that.
As I’ve said previously you will not need to remove any mirrors in your house when you return.
Others will and no amounts of money will cover their cowardly shame.
Good luck to you – you are brave person and not many among the Judiciary and politicians can say that.
But Lady Dorrian must have summed up the evidence before directing the jury to go out and consider their verdict on Salmond, mustn’t she?
She had to be even handed and impartial in her summing up.
She emphasised the Moorov Doctrine in her summing up, having used her power to exclude evidence of collusion between the acusers in the Vietnam Whatsapp group..
That’s pretty damning.
“She had to be even handed and impartial in her summing up”
Do you believe in Santa as well?
John,
I don’t believe in Santa but I believe that judges should be even-handed in their summing up.
Why did the jury acquit him if Lady Dorian biased them against Salmond, as you seem to be suggesting she did. What evidence do you have of this?
The evidence must have been derisory.
Gary, sorry for the snip. It was unnecessary.
Yes, that is the whole point. The evidence is and was derisory. Gordon Dangerfield comments in his latest.
Dorrian biased them against Salmond by concealing the fact of the Vietnam group on Whatsapp. Moorov is predicated on statistical independence of many complainers. Dorrian concealed the fact that the many complainers had colluded extensively when making their allegations.
THEN, thanks to our friend James Dornan, Dorrian granted these complainers anonimity for life IN ORDER TO CONCEAL WHAT SHE HERSELF HAD DONE.
That is why the order is enforced with such frenzy. It is not protecting the complainants. It is protecting the judge herself.
Nice work if you can get it.
I note Wikipedia HM Prison Edinburgh has been updated:
Notable inmates
Peter Tobin – Sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order for the murders of Angelika Kluk, Vicky Hamilton and Dinah McNicol.
Kenny Richey – Served 21 years on death row in Ohio, and spent 6 months at HMP Edinburgh before being found not guilty of Serious Assault to permanent disfigurement and was released on 8 March 2009.
Stephen Gough – A naked rambler repeatedly imprisoned for public nudity.
Eduardo Paolozzi – Scottish sculptor and artist was held here for three months during World War II due to his Italian heritage.
Craig Murray – A Scottish journalist and former UK diplomat was imprisoned here in 2021 after being found in Contempt of Court for ‘Jigsaw Identification’ in HM Advocate v Salmond, the trial of Alex Salmond for allegations of sexual impropriety.
James Forbes – Son of notorious Leith double murderer Donald Forbes was imprisoned here after being found guilty of assault and torture of a man in Largs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HM_Prison_Edinburgh
Craig said in his ‘Going dark’ post:
The Queen kindly paid for my dinners for over twenty years while I was a British diplomat and Ambassador, and now she is going to be paying for my dinners again. That is very kind, I thought she had forgotten me.
Ghislaine Maxwell is awaiting trial in November on charges of helping her ex-boyfriend Jeffrey Epstein procure underage girls for sex.
The US tycoon was also a pal of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, KG, GCVO, CD, ADC (Andrew Albert Christian Edward, born 19 February 1960) the third child and second son of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh who denies claims that he had sex with one of Epstein’s under age victims.
That is why I hope to obtain evidence from Maxwell that the Duke was involved. I also hope to obtain evidence from Julie K. Brown, an investigative reporter with the Miami Herald. Julie has just published, ‘Perversion of Justice’ the Jeffrey Epstein Story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4RM7pP5JFM and I will report my findings here on Craig’s blog.
Do not forget Lord Mandelson, currently puppeting the leader of the opposition.
She wasn’t underage at the time he was alleged to have had sex with her, and of course apart from the revolting Andrew there was Bill Clinton, Tony Blair and Bill Gates amongst many others who jetted off for frolics to Epstein Island.
In the US Virgin Islands, the age of consent for sex with persons more than 5 years older is 18.
Virginia Roberts Guiffre’s allegations are outlined here: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/prince-andrew-sex-allegations-billionaire-jeffrey-epstein-had-21-phone-numbers-bill-clinton-9959491.html
I wonder if the lags network comms channel is accessible somewhere.
Heck we even had photos of JA from Max Security!
The challenge is the news cycle the propagandists rely on and their blind eyeing perfidy. They will be hoping it all goes quiet within a week and in silly season. I think it may be time to get inventive on their spooky derrières.
How do you solve a problem like a bought and bent MSM…?
Once they are bought and funded by Foundations… principles and professionalism and integrity gets booted out. Ever since the Rockefeller and Ford and these old Money types got reinvented over a century ago – the world has become ever more corrupted with their proxies.
Is there a petition to have him released surely there must be.
This is troubling. There were 5 pages + of comments on here the last I looked. Now there are but 3.
I don’t know if this is a temporary anomaly, or if it is a YouTube type removal of contrarian opinions to the Establishment being excised by stealth in the service of perfidy.
No you’ve confused it with the “going dark” post
Thank you. I just realised this. G’day.
No worries 🙂
Jono
The malice of political manipulators can easily be interpreted as greed, but ordinary people’s malice is much more raw and shocking . It was ordinary people in Kent whose overt racism propelled Craig Murray to Scotland. Now he’s in prison he will again be exposed to raw popular ignorance, which is corralled by the Scottish MSM into thinking that Independence is bad for Scotland. When I visited Glasgow recently, I found my immigrant family members fully indoctrinated against independence. Indoctrinated by popular culture.
Politicians want power , so they do what appeals to.voters, not what is beneficial or right. Democracy destroys intellectual thought and delivers populist ignorance.
It must be very tough for Craig physically to be in prison, and mentally to be with wall to wall populist Sturgeon supporters. Ordinary people lap up populist ideas like Russophobia, rape accusations, or Brexit because these ideas are designed by think-tank and newspapers to appeal to ordinary unthinking minds.
After the initial shock of herd stupidity, hopefully Craig will settle into the routine. Herd stupidity exists everywhere.
Surely the bigger/biggest disgrace, which I cannot remember seeing voiced here, or anywhere else that I have visited for that matter, is the abject meek acceptance and silent endorsement of the proceedings by the greater legal profession and justice system/Establishment.
The charge they are now landed with is that of making a mockery of justice and bringing the perceived reputation of those toiling in the field into irreparable disrepute. And such also sows the fertile seeds of popular sedition and justifiable revolution.
J’accuse.
Very careful and responsible of you Jimmy. Nobody reading that comment would ever suspect you think the judge should be violently attacked.
Perish the thought, Jules! Perish the thought ……
Slightly off-topic, but comments are closed on the most recent of Craig’s posts on the Assange case.
The English version of Nils Melzer’s book ‘The trial of Julian Assange’ is due to be published by Verso in February 2022. The German version is already published under the title ‘Der Fall Julian Assange – Geschichte einer Verfolgung’, 336pp (Munich, Piper Verlag, 2021). Melzer’s book makes stinging criticism of the attitudes and behaviour of the British, American, Swedish and (since Moreno’s takeover) Ecuadorian authorities.
Many readers will know that Nils Melzer is the official United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. He is also a professor of international law at the University of Glasgow. Along with two internationally distingushed specialist doctors Melzer visited and examined Assange in Belmarsh Prison on 9 May 2019, a month after his ejection from the Ecuadorian Embassy. They found that Assange had been subjected to psychological torture.
While I’m here, here’s wishing good health and pleasant company to Craig during his own unjustified and vindictive incarceration.
Craig, along with everyone else on here, I’m both saddened and stunned by this horrendous twist of fate regarding your case and the twisted judgement that has seen you banged up. One thing that sprang to mind that may be of some help, given your poor health, would be allocation to the Hospital wing, if you get on a Ward, and there’s no reason to preclude that, no violent history of offences etc, things would be a tad cushier, you might get a job too, which is a bonus, in nick, jobs = perks. Try to see the MO (Medical Officer) as soon as poss.
The Alphabet people
Who initiated the offering of immunity.
Was this immunity individually offered.
Was this immunity a block immunity with no conditions.
Were conditions for immunity put out in writing.
Was immunity threatened to be removed if it came to pass that an Alphabet person had not been truthful.
Alexander Mercouris, editor-in-chief at theduran.com discusses the jailing of Craig Murray and the impending legal straitjacket on independent journalism.
The audio starts about 35 seconds in and the sound quality improves as I made adjustments (sorry, the audio stream was noisy): Play-back time is about 15 minutes on this crucial, far-reaching legislation and codification intended to suppress and contain reporting on Establishment lies, murder, torture, savagery and atrocities that our government agencies want hidden from public view.
Link to the audio file: http://www.coia.org.uk/cm_mercuris.mp3
Mark,
Thank you for that hugely illuminating interview.
I knew when I had my notebook seized at the Ched Evans re-trial in Cardiff on the orders of the judge that something deeply sinister was happening. I felt petrified and now tend to avoid courts. Crucial in the Ched Evans case was that the complainant herself did not go to police to report rape but the CPS prosecuted on that basis.
Mercouris is careful to avoid saying that the complainants in the Salmond case “confabulated” evidence but that was the verdict of the mainly female jury, who did not believe them so cleared him. Lord Archer, of course, went to jail for confabulating evidence in a court room but was not blessed with the idea that he should be believed even after he was disbelieved as it appears to be with these women.
I did not know until recently that Murray had himself been the victim of another failed attempt to accuse him of sexual misdemeanours and was a friend of Salmond’s. That, of course, means he had a personal interest.
I believe that reporters should not be compromised by personal interests and have friendships with defendants but it appears to me that what Lady Dorrian and her retributive feminist cabal are trying to do is to replace one system with major faults with another containing significantly more major faults relying on a Stalinist state making justice closed and darkly sinister by threatening to bring down an overly huge and heavy hammer over the heads of anyone using an incredibly vicious and vindictive interpretation of contempt of court for alleged breaches of reporting restrictions – which, incidentally, also apply for juveniles but do not seem to be so rigorously policed by the judiciary.
Press and public are and must always be exactly the same in a UK court of law, treated the same and seen to be and the right to blog must be defended.
The truth, of course, is that the internet has now made anonymity virtually impossible and it is this, more than anything else, which mainstream media has always resented as it removes hierarchies and robs them of their unchallenged unconditionally superior accredited position as the only story tellers, something Scotland clearly wants to return to.
Lady Dorrian and her ilk will have to ban the internet and issue us all with typewriters and stamps again.
Garry Gibbs. ” unchallenged unconditionally superior accredited position as the only story tellers ” . EXACTLY
“I believe that reporters should not be compromised by personal interests and have friendships with defendants…”
Reasonable in principle, Garry – but what if the only person willing and able to report happens to be a friend of the defendant?
Not that, as far as I can see so far, Mr Salmond is a friend to Mr Murray.
Another good article today on Craig’s predicament by Neil Clark on RT:
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/531013-craig-murray-contempt-court-alex-salmond/
Well, I’d say that it is Scotland that has the predicament. Craig Murray’s incarceration, while extremely important is only the symptom of a very deep disease, which can be traced back to Sturgeon’s office.
Sorry for placing it here!
@Baron,
I’ve left a comment for you on the question you’ve asked
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/07/on-being-a-bit-wrong/comment-page-4/#comment-997163
It seems that comments are no longer being published automatically; probably a wise precaution under the circumstances. Please be patient, and it’s not personal, it’s the same for all commenters.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this, it seems to me it’s high enough profile to become a case study for law students, professors and practioners alike. Vigorous debate should go on for years, and changes be made.
Sadly I don’t think the legal establishment in Scotland is open enough, or has enough courage to do this.
So, basically, another 314 years to come, with little improvement.
If you want to be kept up to date, your best bet is to follow Craig Murray Justice campaign
@cmurrayjustice on Twittter.
Ian – many thanks for this – extremely useful and informative. I was wondering where to find this sort of information.
Would it be possible to put a button for the @cmurrayjustice on Twittter at the top of this web page?
Interesting and, in my view, rather surprising take from the Herald – totally at odds with the judges’ opinion.
“Murray is also not a lawyer and what he wrote was clearly in contempt. What it wasn’t and what it didn’t do was to provide the jigsaw elements, identifying the complainants [sic], on which Lady Dorrian convicted him. I defy anyone outside the journalistic, legal or SNP bubbles to piece together the identities of the women from his blogs. It can’t be done.”
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/19483973.blogger-craig-murray-clearly-contempt-perhaps-snp-will-use-case-restrict-reporting-future/
Right, let’s get this straight:
“CRAIG Murray achieved martyrdom, whether by intention or not, but certainly either through wilful ignorance or total recklessness, by providing the alleged “jigsaw” identification giving the identities of the women complainers alleging sexual assault by Alex Salmond.” (Paragraph 1)
“What it wasn’t and what it didn’t do was to provide the jigsaw elements, identifying the complainants, on which Lady Dorrian convicted him.” (Paragraph 7)
Well that’s cleared that up.
He makes it clear that he is not permitted to write the truth – or at least too much of the truth. When trying to explain the situation to readers, he give the following anecdote –
`As a young reporter I wrote a contentious court report and the paper’s lawyer reviewed it and took me aside. “Far be it for me to interfere with your promotion prospects,” he said. “but if this is published the editor will surely go to jail.” ‘
In other words, he is telling us that it is widely accepted among journalists that they cannot publish good information and that you don’t get on in journalism unless you are prepared to exchange the truth for a lie.
Craig Murray is in jail because he refused to exchange the truth for a lie.
Thanks for your reply Jimmy.
You may well be right. It’s certainly an interesting piece – especially coming from the Herald, of which I’m not a regular reader. I don’t know much about Mr McKay, but I know enough about the Herald to be surprised that the second half of his column wasn’t spiked.
However, I disagree with him that our absent host’s blogposts were ‘totally and slavishly one-sided in favour of Salmond’: to the best of my knowledge, they provided an accurate record of what was said in court on those days, including questions from the prosecution – I’d imagine a court stenographer would have produced something similar, even if he or she was avowedly yoon.
But what about this for a penultimate paragraph?
‘Murray was not given the right to be judged by his peers, a jury. Eight months in jail is a savage and unjust sentence. It is the breaking of the butterfly – and an ailing one – on the wheel. I sympathise with Murray, although he shows no sign of contrition.’
I doubt you’ll find a more supportive statement anywhere in the MSM. As for the 10 (likely moderated) comments under the article, 60% are pro-Craig.
Lapsed Agnostic – yes – well – as I indicated, I think he’s playing a game. In order to get something supportive of Craig Murray into the Herald, he has to put in things like, ‘totally and slavishly one-sided in favour of Salmond’:
It worked. He got something supportive of Craig Murray into the Herald – and this is a major achievement.
His statement about Craig Murray’s reporting (of course) isn’t true. The jury consisted of honest, reasonable people and there was a very good reason why they acquitted Salmond. He had to say something like this, though, to ensure that his statements supportive of Craig Murray weren’t spiked. I infer this from the other things he wrote.
I didn’t look at the readers comments – but yes – it really does say something if in a paper like the Herald (of all papers) the comments are pro-Murray.
The author is clearly saying something about what `contempt of court’ actually means, when he points out that getting Murray on jigsaw identification was clearly absolute rubbish, but nevertheless he says that Murray was in `contempt of court’ anyway. It seems that, as far as the High Court in Edinburgh is concerned, any opprobrious remark about the judiciary, their competence, their probity, is considered to be `contempt of court’.
The reader’s comments – probably highly censored as you point out (so those most in favour of Craig Murray will have been deleted – nevertheless most of them are favourable towards Craig) – indicate that the arrogant and high handed judiciary really has bitten off far more than it can chew here and is heading for a fall.
These ‘people’ live in an alternative universe where truth never ventures and the job of a journalist is to churn out works of political fiction.
Thanks for your reply Stevie.
Further down the column, Mr McKay writes sympathetically about a woman who has been prevented by Highland Council from advertising promotions for her chip shop in Muir of Ord by beaming a powerful searchlight 15 miles into the night sky (surely it would cost less – not least to the environment – to just pay someone to hand out flyers outside Ross County games?). He ends with the words: ‘This is how police states start.’
Project Avalon – War on Independent Journalism Getting More Orwellian By The Day! Craig Murray’s jailing is the latest move in a battle to snuff out Independent Journalism
Very Very Sad
Souless Dorain’s of Scotland
Then there’s Craig’s Doune Fest
“Nicola Sturgeon said it was strange the PM would not meet her during his visit to Scotland.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58079390
I expect Boris has noted how she treats people and feels he wants nothing to do with her.
Wise man.
If he was disgusted by poor treatment of people he would never have .been selected as a candidate for the Conservative party, let alone made leader.
The first symptoms of political leperhood?
A Good Article in The Scotsman by Kenny MacAskill –
Craig Murray’s eight-month prison sentence is vindictive and a sad day for Scottish justice –
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/craig-murrays-eight-month-prison-sentence-is-vindictive-and-a-sad-day-for-scottish-justice-kenny-macaskill-3332548
Can anyone provide me with a link to the records of the Salmond trial?
In particular I want to examine the summing up by the judge.
Pretty please.
When you ask for records of the Salmond trial, are you looking for a court transcript? Do you expect a word-for-word document of the judge’s summing up? Those are confidential to the court and don’t get published.
Grousebeater offered a running commentary during the trial, and described the judge’s final instructions thus:
Judge Lady Dorrian thanks the Defence counsel and turns to the jury to her instructions – explaining points of law, where not to draw conclusions, how not to be subjective, how to be a responsible person on a matter involving reputations and livelihoods, and they must decide on the basis of having no doubt in the minds one way or the other. She tells them that “it’s your judgement that matters, it’s for you alone to decide what is or isn’t important”.
It’s not much, but given the restrictions on reporting I don’t think you’ll find more detail elsewhere.
Yes – why would there be a court transcript or a public record of what the judge told the jury?
It’s not as if it were a matter of public interest.
They wish.
I’m not sure at which point you started following this saga, but I’d expect most people to be aware that a veil of secrecy was cast over the whole affair in virtue of the anonymity order for sexual assault complainants. There are severe restrictions on what can be reported. You may have worked out that’s why the host of this blog has been jailed. If the court published full transcripts of proceedings, it would be in contempt of itself and would have to prosecute accordingly.
It’s very much a matter of public interest in view of the evidenced collusion between complainers, contrary to the Moorov doctrine. Craig tried to steer a course between exposing this perfidy and respecting the anonymity order, but didn’t do so successfully.
You’re welcome to make your public interest case to the judge, who would have to give permission for her summing up statement to be made public. Good luck.
Thank you all. Very much appreciated.
I’m led to believe that it may be possible to apply to the Clerk of Justiciary for a transcript (subject to redaction with respect to the court order, I would imagine) pursuant to section 94 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. However, there are likely to be significant charges for this service.
Hi all.
Has anyone heard how Craig’s getting on in jail?
What’s Craigs mail address? I’d like to write to him, maybe everyone should.
He may be suffering “jail shock” which will likely disorientate him for some time.
Which jail is he in? I hope he’s avoided solitary confinement in the medical cells.
When will Craig make it to general population?
At the moment I guess he is still being processed in the remand section under conditions designed to hinder people attempting to defend themselves against the legal system.
Have his lawyers lost interest now that Craig is locked away and prevented from pestering them? Its amazing how unhelpful most people are to crims.
I may have missed something here.
Any word at all would be appreciated.
Craig Murray Justice campaign @cmurrayjustice
3:29 pm · 6 Aug 2021
Any letters to Craig can be addressed to:
157095 C Murray
G3/34
H M Prison Edinburgh
33 Stenhouse Road
Edinburgh
EH11 3LN
There also is a volunteer and family-service run provided by the below website, that allows users to send emails. A single message costs 40p and an additional 25p means a reply sheet is included.
Craig’s prisoner # is 157095. https://emailaprisoner.com