Does it matter if Sturgeon is guilty - do you know or care?

[sessell]

Evidence of a conspiracy to frame Alex Salmond has been building. There are compelling reports in the Times, Herald , Sky News and across the internet. But there is less reporting in Scotland and a lot of people seem to not know or care. I'm Scottish but I don't live there. I've been hooked by this as a story of power and corruption. I'm on the fence re independence, just don't know enough so don't have an axe in that debate. I've never been an SNP member. But I do care about justice and that no-one should be above the law, especially politicians when they are seeking to imprison their potential rivals.

After reading this affadavit from Craig Murray which brings it all together and is incendiary I'm pretty convinced there has been a conspiracy and that Sturgeon and her collaborators should face justice. Although the justice department (Crown office) also seem to be mired in this. Here is the affadavit www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2021/01/my-sworn-evidence-on-the-sturgeon-affair/

I've shown this to a few people and have been shocked that a couple have said, yes it stinks but I like Sturgeon. I'd be interested in the views of Scotsnet. How much do you know about this? Do you care? Is it OK for our politicians to imprison their rivals, like Putin and co do, if you like their other objectives. Has Scotland become a corrupt nation? Is that OK?

@StatisticallyChallenged

They're trying to spin this out til may, aren't they?

March. Committee will be disolved then...

Oh God. Of course...I'd forgotten that. Well, that's it then, surely? That's only a month away, and all the arguments arising from this could easily delay their findings beyond then.

Oh it’s on newsnight now

The Newsnight report was excellent. Says there is a chance Salmond may appear on Friday now. This is also now all over the mainstream press - so to answer the question at the beginning of this thread - I think everyone knows by now! Some of the coverage is rubbish though and stuck on the meeting dates and he said/ she said. (Looking at you channel 4 news tonight). Daily Mail piece is v good. @daisy's summary here very succinctly covers the key points.

But have to agree with others that the best reportage on this unfolding scandal is the wings over Scotland blog.

I'd add/tweak a couple of things from Daisy's (I know she didn't write it specifically)

• the process was supposed to be confidential, then despite that the SG advised him they were going to publish the findings. He said he'd get an interdict to stop them given it was still very much under dispute regarding process
• they said they wouldn't release it
• it was then leaked to the Daily Record hours later, too late for them to get a judge to interdict
• the most likely source for the leak is widely cited as the FM's office, namely her chief of staff.
• the judicial review didnt, AFAIK, include the fact the investigator had previous contact with the complainers because that bit wasn't actually known. They basically said the process was unjust/illegal but that element came out during the JR.
• this was what caused the SG legal team to threaten to pull out. They'd already said the case was weak and should be conceded (not that we can see most of the advice as it was very redacted) but at this point they had had enough.
• there is a pretty much total absence of meeting minutes for the regular meets that were happening as the SG was fighting the JR. Or so they say.

• the number of complainers increased significantly over this period. The internal complaints process considered 2, by the time it went to court another 8 were added.

Sorry just realised my point re the JR is unclear
The apparent bias of the investigator wasn't one of the original points which caused the JR to be launched as that part wasn't known about. It was however the reason the JR was conceded

What a shitshow. A very expensive shitshow.

Alistair Bonnington has written a damming article regarding the Crown Office handling of this. It’s really quite worrying that our once esteemed legal establishment is being pulled into this, it gets murkier day by day.

It sounds like a murky cesspool.

Do you have a link selkies?

just saw that on twitter - Bonnington is in The Scotsman

@Viviennemary

It sounds like a murky cesspool.

certainly is ...

I hope this works as I read it on my desktop:
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.scotsman.com/news/politics/why-crown-office-has-become-lickspittle-arm-of-snp-government-alistair-bonnington-3144643%3famp

Thanks Selkies

It does seem to be slowly seeping out and moving from the "crazy conspiracy " bloggers and twitter to the mainstream. The handling at least smells, and these latest redactions are causing a great many WTFs

I did a quick look at online media after momentarily getting sucked into Scottish legal news and this was the lead article on the daily mail online.

Whatever anyone thinks of the daily mail it is one of the most widely read online newspapers and to read the democratic process in my own country being ripped apart was hard to stomach.

I am so angry at this and how so many are continuing to turn a blind eye to possible corruption at the heart of government and indeed MY government not some other country. Bloody shameful.

I just don't understand what they're playing at? I thought it was a bit of a storm in a teacup, and AS just trying to stir up trouble and it would all blow over with nothing really happening.

By redacting the parts of AS's evidence relating to NS after it was released, they make themselves look totally corrupt. They may retain NS as leader, but they've done a huge amount of damage to the SNP and the credibility of the government.

Surely would have been better to let NS resign assuming she was found to have mislead parliament and avoid the worse reputational damage?

The very fact they redacted it strongly implies it's true and can be proven to be.

agree vivienne.

I think the lord advocate is answering questions in parliament later

@Viviennemary

The very fact they redacted it strongly implies it's true and can be proven to be.

They do not want Geoff Aberdein's evidence to be heard, whether directly or indirectly.

I'm guessing his version of the conversations will make Sturgeon's prior knowledge very clear and therefore blow the head round the door, first time I heard anything version out of the water

Ooft have you seen what NS said in her briefing today about AS's behaviour? I do agree with her, but it's pretty inflammatory for her to say it on TV.

The gist of it was that the behaviour the women complained about happened it was just found not to be criminal...

Isn't that fairy thin ice? I thought there's were a couple of incidences which were in that ilk but others which were actively disputed as having ever occured (the attempted rape charge, those involving the car, I think there was one at Stirling Castle and that's off the top of my head)

The "they all happened but just were criminal" line seems to be a misrepresentation of at least some

I agree, @Selkiesarereal. I find it so depressing and unfortunately, in my view, will make people question whether Scottish politics is ready for independence. Nicola Sturgeon and her clique has done so much damage.

*have

I didnt see the briefing today .. why is NS allowed to talk about this at all .its a covid briefing. If she is talking about other things its a party political broadcast and should be treated as such .. ie the same amoutnt of air time given to other parties

I thought that statement today was totally wrong on so many levels and really showed her up