Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Scotsnet

Welcome to Scotsnet - discuss all aspects of life in Scotland, including relocating, schools and local areas.

Original poster

Salmond v Sturgeon Round 3 — Comment along with Sturgeon

999 replies

PolkadotsAndMoonbeams · 03/03/2021 13:16

Previous thread here.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
IsurviveonCoffeeandWinein2021 · 04/03/2021 17:11

No @StatisticallyChallenged was at @kurtrussellsbeard saying wax is full of bluster and bullshit and should be a politician whilst defending NS doing exactly that. My apologies thread had moved before I posted.

StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 17:14

@IsurviveonCoffeeandWinein2021

No *@StatisticallyChallenged was at @kurtrussellsbeard* saying wax is full of bluster and bullshit and should be a politician whilst defending NS doing exactly that. My apologies thread had moved before I posted.
No worries Wink
IsurviveonCoffeeandWinein2021 · 04/03/2021 17:23

The advice is out. Nick eardly just tweeted it

kurtrussellsbeard · 04/03/2021 17:28

@IsurviveonCoffeeandWinein2021 I actually wasn't defending NS doing just that. I was arguing for that MF asked her to apologise for AS.

WaxOnFeckOff · 04/03/2021 17:30

Oh I missed the message, I was having din er. I assume someone lost the cool? I was genuinely trying to explain but oh well.

kurtrussellsbeard · 04/03/2021 17:38

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. This repeats a deleted post. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheShadowyFeminist · 04/03/2021 17:43

Link to all the legal docs (so far)

Getting back to the point of this thread.

Reminder 🪨

anon444877 · 04/03/2021 17:44

Taking a hands off approach is one thing, but it didn't work out did it? If we are really better than the tories (i see no evidence of this so far), I'd expect to see some concrete steps, not just sackings, steps to better ensure it can't happen again aside from the personalities involved.

WaxOnFeckOff · 04/03/2021 17:50

I have no idea I didn't see or report it but if you've just repeated it that might be more of a problem?

kurtrussellsbeard · 04/03/2021 17:52

@WaxOnFeckOff

I have no idea I didn't see or report it but if you've just repeated it that might be more of a problem?
Well we'll soon find out!
StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 17:52

Not seeing much in the new releases tbh - they haven't filled the gap

TheShadowyFeminist · 04/03/2021 18:05

There's references to reporting restrictions & how to ensure that details of the JR, and the decision report are kept out of the press (!) with 2 options on how to do that. From September. One of the 2 options is to sist the JR. That's then confirmed as an option by the LA, also September.

Salmond said in his evidence last Friday that he felt there was a belief that getting the JR sisted by some would be a way to ensure the criminal case overtook the JR. Reading the details of the advice from September, it's given as a way to limit disclosure of the investigation & decision report.

Without details of the minutes from the 17 meetings which still haven't been released, its not possible to say that what Salmond alleged was true, but they certainly seriously considered it. The discussions by the (non legal) participants certainly could have been along the lines of a belief that sisting the JR would get them 'off the hook' but I'm not sure they'll actually release the meetings notes. I got a sense that Salmond has these from the criminal case. But again, I'm guessing at that.

TheShadowyFeminist · 04/03/2021 18:18

This is interesting 🤨

Tweet Link

"The government is paying an undisclosed sum to Sir Philip Rutnam, who quit as the Home Office's permanent secretary accusing Home Secretary Priti Patel of a "vicious and orchestrated briefing campaign" against him. How much did this cost the taxpayer? Shouldn't we be told?"

Further down it says

"£370k (inc £30k costs) apparently."

I'm guessing £1M wasted money on a failed JR due to incompetence is par for the course?

StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 18:18

@TheShadowyFeminist

There's references to reporting restrictions & how to ensure that details of the JR, and the decision report are kept out of the press (!) with 2 options on how to do that. From September. One of the 2 options is to sist the JR. That's then confirmed as an option by the LA, also September.

Salmond said in his evidence last Friday that he felt there was a belief that getting the JR sisted by some would be a way to ensure the criminal case overtook the JR. Reading the details of the advice from September, it's given as a way to limit disclosure of the investigation & decision report.

Without details of the minutes from the 17 meetings which still haven't been released, its not possible to say that what Salmond alleged was true, but they certainly seriously considered it. The discussions by the (non legal) participants certainly could have been along the lines of a belief that sisting the JR would get them 'off the hook' but I'm not sure they'll actually release the meetings notes. I got a sense that Salmond has these from the criminal case. But again, I'm guessing at that.

Yes good point - I noted the sisting conversation and you have a point. There's still a LOT missing though.
TheShadowyFeminist · 04/03/2021 18:20

"There's still a LOT missing though."

Oh I agree. And I think as the panic started kicking in when they realised how much they'd screwed up, that's when the sist option probably came back into focus, particularly for those non legal people who were making decisions. It's the discussions as it all fell apart that I think will be most revealing.

Will we ever get them though? 🤷🏻‍♀️

StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 18:31

I doubt it tbh TheShadowyFeminist

Something which occured to me - actually when the Rangers case was mentioned - if Alex Salmond wished to take legal action of his own (a malicious prosecution case, for example) then at the moment he has a major limitation; a chunk of his evidence of what went on was disclosed to him as part of the criminal trial evidence and as such he couldn't use it. He could apply to the court to do so (as per the rangers case) but I'd imagine it might be harder to get agreement because of the nature of the case.

If, however, more of that evidence was to come in to the public domain via the committee then he could use it (I think). Therefore it may suit him very well for more evidence to come out and not just because he wants the truth to be known.

Just a theory, no I don't have evidence, just mulling!

GirlLovesWorld · 04/03/2021 18:35

I see it's confirmed now that the SNP got 5000 new members in the last 24 hours! 😮

TheShadowyFeminist · 04/03/2021 18:40

It's a decent theory.

He's never have got near the legal advice without the process the committee have gone through, so who knows what more he's going to be able to get from this. But I do think those 17 meetings would be him hitting the jackpot. Actually, you've made me realise that the legal advice & the legal restrictions aren't just about the complainants but also about future liability for the government. Not sure why that hasn't occurred to me much! I've thought about it, but sort of discounted it as thought Salmond really wouldn't want to go down that route. Depending on what this whole process uncovers for him, who knows 🤷🏻‍♀️

Selkiesarereal · 04/03/2021 18:41

5,000 people who have failed to notice that the Scottish government didn’t contact the police when name of the complainant was leaked to the press.

With that and the hate crime, what a great country to be a female. Think I’m done here.

StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 18:43

@Selkiesarereal

5,000 people who have failed to notice that the Scottish government didn’t contact the police when name of the complainant was leaked to the press.

With that and the hate crime, what a great country to be a female. Think I’m done here.

I wonder how many of them have "known Nicola since she was 16".
StatisticallyChallenged · 04/03/2021 18:44

@TheShadowyFeminist

It's a decent theory.

He's never have got near the legal advice without the process the committee have gone through, so who knows what more he's going to be able to get from this. But I do think those 17 meetings would be him hitting the jackpot. Actually, you've made me realise that the legal advice & the legal restrictions aren't just about the complainants but also about future liability for the government. Not sure why that hasn't occurred to me much! I've thought about it, but sort of discounted it as thought Salmond really wouldn't want to go down that route. Depending on what this whole process uncovers for him, who knows 🤷🏻‍♀️

Indeed, the govt could easily be sued by the women too in theory

Oh what a tangled web...

Selkiesarereal · 04/03/2021 18:45

statistical for someone who doesn’t do twitter even I know about that one! 😂

StarryEyeSurprise · 04/03/2021 18:47

@GirlLovesWorld

I see it's confirmed now that the SNP got 5000 new members in the last 24 hours! 😮
Yeah. Also, I saw the twitter response- much admiration for the FM, here and down South.
OldRailer · 04/03/2021 18:47

"I've known Nicola since she was 16"was amusing.

WaxOnFeckOff · 04/03/2021 18:48

I wonder how many of those people who knew Nicola when she was 16 were born after 1986?

Swipe left for the next trending thread