Kirsty Wark documentary about Alex Salmond sexual assault case

"never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

It's a poor state of affairs when this is the best we can hope for.

@BlackForestCake

I identified one of the complainants thanks to a journalistic article published months before the trial. My suspicion was confirmed thanks to Dani Garavelli's article in the aftermath. How on earth Craig Murray is being held in contempt while these 'mainstream' journalists are not is beyond me. I've had long-standing concerns about Craig Murray's mental health, but I can't see anything on his blog that could be said to risk identifying the complainants without acknowledging that prior articles were even more intransigent in that regard.

The thing that baffles me about all of this is how on earth Leslie Evans has remained in post throughout, and at the very least not been placed on gardening leave pending the outcome of these enquiries. She, more than anyone, is responsible for the utterly farcical manner in which the initial enquiries into this were handled. The degree of blatant poor practice suggests that either she is utterly incompetent, or that along with several others (who I can't name, otherwise I'd expect this post to be deleted) actively engaged in a plot to 'nail' Salmond.

The laughable thing about it, is that if the allegations of conspiracy are true, and this was a plot by a pro-Sturgeon sect to bring down Salmond, then in the course of their scheming they have inadvertently dragged the First Minister into in in a manner that either a) makes her look utterly naive, or b) entirely complicit. Either way, I think she's in hot water if it emerges that the initial internal SG handling of this was anything other than just a colossally incompetent shambles right from the very start. I hope for her sake that this is one of those occasions that fits the narrative of "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity".

My personal opinion on this is that Evans is simply incompetent, but she was taken advantage of by the first of the complainants, and thanks to the original failings of the procedure and due to poor practice, the thing grew arms and legs driven by someone with a grudge until it became this monster consisting of 14 serious criminal charges. I think Salmond is undoubtedly a sleaze, but I think the root of why he was never convicted of a single criminal act lies firmly and squarely with the individuals who were responsible for the conception, introduction, and facilitation of a laughably inadequate new set of procedures, who then went about handling the internal investigation in a completely cack-handed and amateurish manner.

I do think at least some of the allegations against Salmond, possibly the vast majority of them, are absolutely true, but the women involved have, first of all, been led up the garden path, then horribly let down by the people they entrusted to act on their behalf.

But then again, the complete farce of the Equality Impact Assessments done for the SPS, for instance, is also staggering incompetence, and yet it is par for the course.

It’s incredible.

If you really hate the SNP, you should look into this trial a bit more closely.

Why only if you hate the SNP?

Just as an aside: it is still possible for the trial to be a corrupt stitch-up, even if you believe the complainants.

The complainants have all been granted anonymity, but allegedly both Dani Garavelli’s article and Wark’s programme allow at least one of them to be identifed. Neither are being prosecuted, but pro-Salmond journalists Mark Hirst and Craig Murray, who have not identifed the complainants, are being prosecuted.

There is a lot more to this story than there appears to be.

So what? Personally I think making candidates choose which house they want to sit in isn't unreasonable.

I agree. Sitting MPs/MSPs shouldn't be able to just switch parliaments at significant cost and this rule should have been in place from the start.

However, I don't think it's fair for this rule to apply to currently sitting MP/MSPs - it should only apply to new ones IMO.

We have been through this. The NEC were demanding that MPs resign their Westminster seats before even being selected as a candidate for a Holyrood seat. There is no precedent for that.

Cherry was hollering for Salmon to be brought back into the party as soon as the verdict was known. Whilst he was not convicted by his and his QC's own admission his conduct towards women was extremely questionable.

I don't know how the proclaimed feminist Cherry squares that nor how her supporters on here square it.

That's right. Which had been standard practise previously.

'No one "runs" for First Minister' - thanks for clarification. Recent rule change by NEC has effectively excluded Cherry from standing[?] for FM.

Members of the NEC include Alyn Smith, Rhiannon Spear, etc.

Here is a detailed account of the court case.

www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/your-man-finally-in-the-public-gallery-the-alex-salmond-trial-day-7/

Some parts are redacted as the journalist (Murray) is pending a contempt of court hearing. Some people describe Murray as a conspiracy theorist.

Just leaving relevant articles here for those who wish to read.

Joanna Cherry is a supporter of Salmond, btw. Note the recent change in rules to stop her from running for FM

I'm always surprised at the fawning over her on this board. No one "runs" for First Minister. She can choose to go for a Holyrood seat if she wants.

Very interested in your comments on this anyoldprion as apart from anything else I know next to nothing about Scottish politics. May I ask you about this bit:

A small, but vocal clique, many of them young women, have managed the latter, so now I find myself very doubtful when I hear a court case was brought against a man who threatened their power..

Forgive me if I have massively got the wrong end of the stick but - are the "vocal clique" the ones pushing for self ID etc and is/was Alex Salmond gender critical and having none of it?

I find it very disturbing that some of the charges are being minimised as not significant enough for a court case. Bringing multiple complaints from multiple women establishes a pattern of behaviour, which supports the requirement for corroboration.

As for a political conspiracy: for what purpose? Alex Salmond’s political career had run its course and he was spending most of his time on Russian TV when the complaints were made.

Anyone who tries to argue that this is all about SNP infighting, while ignoring the issue of the high percentage of acquittals in sexual assault trials, is probably deliberately obfuscating.

Here's the other article. Apologies if this is more than anyone wants to know about the state of Scottish politics - I find it pretty worrying tbh.

sourcenews.scot/robin-mcalpine-the-foundations-of-scotlands-democracy-have-crumbled-and-you-should-worry/

news.stv.tv/politics/snp-mp-joanna-cherry-wont-seek-nomination-for-holyrood

More on Cherry.

www.thenational.scot/news/18618819.snp-nec-force-cherry-resign-mp-wants-stand-msp/

The NEC have been making some very shady moves recently. They're trying to oust certain politicians and using really contentious methods. There was a very interesting - and worrying - article on it posted here recently, I'll see if I can find it. Criticising various of SNPs actions, including the aligning of the civil service with the Scotgov, when it shd be scrupulously impartial.

itsallgoingtobefine shocked to read that they have refused to answer this question, wonder what the reason was as I think that it’s a really important one!

Joanna Cherry is a supporter of Salmond, btw. Note the recent change in rules to stop her from running for FM.

I’ve been busy recently and often absent from this board and Twitter and I seem to have missed this. Is there somewhere I can read about it?

The idea that 9 different women agreed to lie to the police and the court for political reasons is to me less likely than him doing this stuff.

So the defence witnesses who were present at some of the ocsassions (Inc female witnesses) lied instead?

It will be interesting to find out the answer during the review as to whether female staff were not to work with him alone.

The civil service woman refused to answer that question, and was backed up by the head of the committee.

'This case has done damage to sexual assault cases'. Yep. It should never have been brought to court.

The initial enquiry was thrown out and Salmond awarded costs of £500k. Then he is absolved in court and it is shown very clearly that some of the allegations were impossible, that is to say, completely made up. I'm not sure what else is needed to show that this is a politically motivated case.

Joanna Cherry is a supporter of Salmond, btw. Note the recent change in rules to stop her from running for FM.

I find AnyOldPrion's conspiracy theory wholly incredible.

A few years ago, I’d have found it incredible too. But if you had told me back then, that councils in Scotland would bring in rules that said cross-dressers and transvestites must be allowed in women’s changing rooms and that the Scottish government would pay lobby groups and women’s shelters to lobby them to allow men to have women’s rights, simply because they signed a form, I’d have thought you were insane.

A small, but vocal clique, many of them young women, have managed the latter, so now I find myself very doubtful when I hear a court case was brought against a man who threatened their power and seems to have included at least one case where the woman was provably not there when she claims the incident occurred.

As I said before, anyone who reads this board regularly must surely have had their eyes opened to the fact that there are some deeply serious concerns about the current power play that’s occurring in Scotland.

Actually, I disagree that there’s something in it because 9 women were involved. I think the police messed this up. Having listened to the court reports each day you had to wonder why some of the complaints were put forward. I wonder how different the outcome would have been with a reduced number of women and only the more serious allegations.

But, he was found innocent and this was definitely a hit piece. It’s clear they thought he was going to be found guilty and went with that narrative. They shouldn’t have shown it.

The whole thing saddens me. I know women who have suffered brutal assaults and the police and the procurator fiscal have failed them by not proceeding with their case. Then you hear some of the stuff put forward in this case and think how did this get to court. This case has done damage to sexual assault cases.